Abstract
I evaluate two contractualist approaches to the ethics of risk: mutual constraint and the probabilistic, ex ante approach. After explaining how these approaches address problems in earlier interpretations of contractualism, I object that they fail to respond to diverse risk preferences in populations. Some people could reasonably reject the risk thresholds associated with these approaches. A strategy for addressing this objection is considering individual risk preferences, similar to those Buchak discusses concerning expected-utility approaches to risk. I defend the risk-preferences-Adjusted (RISPREAD) contractualist approach, which calculates a population's average risk preference and permits risk thresholds below that preference, only.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 260-283 |
Number of pages | 24 |
Journal | Economics and Philosophy |
Volume | 37 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Jul 2021 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Philosophy
- Economics and Econometrics
Keywords
- Scanlon
- contractualism
- risk
- risk-weighted expected utility (REU) theory