Volume 7, Number 1
January 2013
DISCUSSION

The Case of the Miners

Volume 7, Number 1, January 2013, Pages 1–9
https://doi.org/10.26556/jesp.v7i1.153
PDFPDF

Abstract

This discussion note attempts to show that, pace Niko Kolodny and John MacFarlane, the Miners case intuitively speaks in favor of subjectivism. I argue that properly understood the intuitively correct judgements concerning the case are compatible with subjectivism. My argument is based, among other things, on a comparison between the Miners case and other cases as well as on considerations of blameworthiness.
Copyright © 2013 Vuko Andrić
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.
|

“Ought” and the Perspective of the Agent

Benjamin Kiesewetter

Reframing Epistemic Partiality: A Case for Acceptance

Laura K. Soter

The Case for Voting to Change the Outcomes Is Weaker Than It May Seem: A Reply to Zach Barnett

Amir Liron and David Enoch

Are Savior Siblings a Special Case in Procreative Ethics?

Caleb Althorpe and Elizabeth Finneron-Burns

Don’t Be Cruel: Building the Case for Luck in the Law

Alexander Sarch

The Case for Consent Pluralism

Jessica Keiser

The Case for Stance-Dependent Reasons

David Sobel

The Abductive Case for Humeanism Over Quasi-Perceptual Theories of Desire

Derek Baker

Working Hard and Kicking Back: The Case for Diachronic Perfectionism

Antti Kauppinen

Portico