Making a vague difference
Kagan, Nefsky and the Sorites Paradox
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21334876 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mattias Gunnemyr (0000-0002-9060-1242, Lund University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 67 |
| Issue | 9 |
| Pages | 3501-3526 |
| Publication date | 2024-10-20 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Inquiry (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-174X • E-ISSN: 1502-3923 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/0020174x.2022.2052351 |
| OpenAlex | W4226415396 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 30 |
In collective harm cases, bad consequences follow if enough people act in a certain way even though no such individual act makes a difference for the worse. Global warming, overfishing and Derek Parfit’s famous case of the harmless torturers are some examples of such harm. Shelly Kagan argues that there is a threshold such that one single act might trigger harm in all collective harm cases. Julia Nefsky points to serious shortcomings in Kagan’s argument, but does not show that his conclusion is incorrect. I argue that our best theories of vagueness (the epistemic view of vagueness, three-valued logic, and supervaluationism) entail that there is a threshold in all collective harm cases. However, my analysis points to another problem with Kagan’s argument: the thresholds are not necessarily perceptible. Given the assumption that only perceptible differences matter morally, passing such a threshold does not necessarily trigger morally relevant harm, pace Kagan. Last, I consider two variants of Kagan’s argument and find both problematic. One controversially assumes that observational relations like ‘cannot perceive the difference between’ are transitive. The other problematically assumes that so called triangulation always is possible
Argument (complex analysis) · Epistemology · Harm · Linguistics · Quine · Sociology · Vagueness · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Free Will and Agency · Philosophy · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Social Psychology
The Possibility of Parity
Vagueness
Weighing Lives
The Liar and Sorites Paradoxes
Consequentialism and Collective Action
Act‐utilitarian prisoner's dilemmas
Cyclical preferences and rational choice
Sorites Paradoxes and the Semantics of Vagueness
Consequentialism and the Problem of Collective Harm
Vagueness, truth and logic
There are no ordinary things
Wang's paradox
The Sorites Paradox
Rethinking the GoodMoral Ideals and the Nature of Practical Reasoning
Comparing Harms
Do I Make a Difference
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2025 - 2025 (1) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |