Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Incommensurability and healthcare priority setting

Herlitz, Anders LU (2024) In Philosophical Studies
Abstract

This paper argues that accepting incommensurability can be a useful step for developing attractive hybrid theories to how to distribute scarce health-related resources. If one provides opportunity for distributive options to be incommensurable with respect to substantive criteria, one can hold on to substantive criteria while also providing room for decision processes to play a significant role. The paper also argues that the strategy of accepting incommensurability is preferable to the strategy of having substantive criteria establish sets of options that are equally, explains why incommensurability gives us reason to go hybrid, and argues that reasons grounded in decision processes have properties that make them appropriate as... (More)

This paper argues that accepting incommensurability can be a useful step for developing attractive hybrid theories to how to distribute scarce health-related resources. If one provides opportunity for distributive options to be incommensurable with respect to substantive criteria, one can hold on to substantive criteria while also providing room for decision processes to play a significant role. The paper also argues that the strategy of accepting incommensurability is preferable to the strategy of having substantive criteria establish sets of options that are equally, explains why incommensurability gives us reason to go hybrid, and argues that reasons grounded in decision processes have properties that make them appropriate as “tiebreakers” in choice situations characterized by incommensurability.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
epub
subject
keywords
Distributive theory, Healthcare rationing, Hybrid theories, Incommensurability, Priority-setting
in
Philosophical Studies
publisher
Springer
external identifiers
  • scopus:85192713275
ISSN
0031-8116
DOI
10.1007/s11098-024-02160-4
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
2d4a614f-fea7-407a-95bc-8eba61e5e18b
date added to LUP
2024-06-10 13:00:31
date last changed
2024-06-10 13:01:25
@article{2d4a614f-fea7-407a-95bc-8eba61e5e18b,
  abstract     = {{<p>This paper argues that accepting incommensurability can be a useful step for developing attractive hybrid theories to how to distribute scarce health-related resources. If one provides opportunity for distributive options to be incommensurable with respect to substantive criteria, one can hold on to substantive criteria while also providing room for decision processes to play a significant role. The paper also argues that the strategy of accepting incommensurability is preferable to the strategy of having substantive criteria establish sets of options that are equally, explains why incommensurability gives us reason to go hybrid, and argues that reasons grounded in decision processes have properties that make them appropriate as “tiebreakers” in choice situations characterized by incommensurability.</p>}},
  author       = {{Herlitz, Anders}},
  issn         = {{0031-8116}},
  keywords     = {{Distributive theory; Healthcare rationing; Hybrid theories; Incommensurability; Priority-setting}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  publisher    = {{Springer}},
  series       = {{Philosophical Studies}},
  title        = {{Incommensurability and healthcare priority setting}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11098-024-02160-4}},
  doi          = {{10.1007/s11098-024-02160-4}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}