Document Type

Article

Publication Date

10-1-2022

Publication Title

Moral Philosophy and Politics

Volume

9

Issue

2

First Page

293

Keywords

political theory, public policy, welfare-consequentialism

Last Page

322

Abstract

Which individuals should count in a welfare-consequentialist analysis of public policy? Some answers to this question are parochial, and others are more inclusive. The most inclusive possible answer is 'everybody to count for one.' In other words, all individuals who are capable of having welfare - including foreigners, the unborn, and non-human animals - should be weighed equally. This article argues that 'who should count' is a question that requires a two-level answer. On the first level, a specification of welfare-consequentialism serves as an ethical ideal, a claim about the attributes that the ideal policy would have. 'Everybody to count for one' might succeed on this level. However, on the second level is the welfare-consequentialist analysis procedure used by human analysts to give advice on real policy questions. For epistemic reasons, the analysis procedure should be more parochial than 'everybody to count for one'.

DOI

10.1515/mopp-2020-0014

ISSN

21945616

E-ISSN

21945624

Download

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS