Nondeterminacy, two-step models and justified choice
(2019) In Ethics 129(2). p.284-308- Abstract
- This article analyzes approaches to nondeterminacy (e.g., incommensurability, indeterminacy, parity) that suggest that one can make justified choices when primary criteria fail to fully determine a best alternative by introducing a secondary criterion. It is shown that these approaches (in the article called “two-step models”) risk violating Basic Contraction Consistency. Some ways of adjusting two-step models in order to protect against this are addressed, and it is suggested that proponents of two-step models should adopt formal conditions which qualify what counts as a permissible secondary criterion that resemble supervaluationist conditions that qualify what counts as admissible precisifications of vague terms.
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/fdc21cf2-df18-49b1-99b1-3b6aa8642d25
- author
- Herlitz, Anders LU
- publishing date
- 2019
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Ethics
- volume
- 129
- issue
- 2
- pages
- 284 - 308
- publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85059104369
- ISSN
- 1539-297X
- DOI
- 10.1086/700032
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- no
- id
- fdc21cf2-df18-49b1-99b1-3b6aa8642d25
- date added to LUP
- 2024-12-10 14:51:35
- date last changed
- 2025-04-04 15:27:51
@article{fdc21cf2-df18-49b1-99b1-3b6aa8642d25,
abstract = {{This article analyzes approaches to nondeterminacy (e.g., incommensurability, indeterminacy, parity) that suggest that one can make justified choices when primary criteria fail to fully determine a best alternative by introducing a secondary criterion. It is shown that these approaches (in the article called “two-step models”) risk violating Basic Contraction Consistency. Some ways of adjusting two-step models in order to protect against this are addressed, and it is suggested that proponents of two-step models should adopt formal conditions which qualify what counts as a permissible secondary criterion that resemble supervaluationist conditions that qualify what counts as admissible precisifications of vague terms.}},
author = {{Herlitz, Anders}},
issn = {{1539-297X}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{2}},
pages = {{284--308}},
publisher = {{University of Chicago Press}},
series = {{Ethics}},
title = {{Nondeterminacy, two-step models and justified choice}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/700032}},
doi = {{10.1086/700032}},
volume = {{129}},
year = {{2019}},
}