How It All Relates : Exploring the Space of Value Comparisons
(2017) Abstract
 This thesis explores whether the three standard value relations, “better than”, “worse than” and “equally as good”, exhaust the possibilities in which things can relate with respect to their value. Or more precisely, whether there are examples in which one of these relations is not instantiated. There are cases in which it is not obvious that one of these relations does obtain; these are referred to as “hard cases of comparison”. These hard cases of comparison become interesting, since if it not the case that the standard three value relations obtains in these cases then the three standard relations do not exhaust the possibility of instantiated value relations. It is argued that for some of the hard cases of comparison, the standard... (More)
 This thesis explores whether the three standard value relations, “better than”, “worse than” and “equally as good”, exhaust the possibilities in which things can relate with respect to their value. Or more precisely, whether there are examples in which one of these relations is not instantiated. There are cases in which it is not obvious that one of these relations does obtain; these are referred to as “hard cases of comparison”. These hard cases of comparison become interesting, since if it not the case that the standard three value relations obtains in these cases then the three standard relations do not exhaust the possibility of instantiated value relations. It is argued that for some of the hard cases of comparison, the standard relations determinately obtain. For some it is indeterminate, due to vagueness, which of the three relations obtains, but it is determinate that one of them obtains. Thereafter it is argued that the influential Collapsing Argument fails in ruling out other accounts of the hard cases of comparison. Since one cannot depend on the Collapsing Argument in order to conclude that all items are related by the standard three relations, the investigation continues. It is argued that none of the hard cases of comparison are cases of incomparability. Furthermore, none of them are cases of a fourth basic positive value relation such as “parity”. Consequently, for all the hard cases of comparison one of the standard value relations holds, although sometimes we do not know which one and sometimes it is indeterminate which one holds. This means that there is no reason to assume that one of the standard three value relations does not hold between items we are comparing. This is followed by a brief discussion about the normative consequences of this result. The thesis ends with four different appendices in which related topics are discussed. (Less)
 Abstract (Swedish)
 Avhandlingen fokuserar på ojämförbarhet med avseende på värde. Jag avser att förklara varför det ibland kan vara svårt att jämföra vissa objekt. I min avhandling argumenterar jag för att det är språklig vaghet som ger upphov till ojämförbarhet. Jag diskuterar även andra saker så som: huruvida "bättre än" en transitiv relation, om det finns mer relationer än "bättre än", "sämre än" och "lika bra", samt strukturen på våra värderelationer.
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/9bec2211a86849f3bac0c6659cce0279
 author
 Andersson, Henrik ^{LU}
 supervisor

 Wlodek Rabinowicz ^{LU}
 Toni RønnowRasmussen ^{LU}
 opponent

 professor Carlson, Erik, Uppsala universitet
 organization
 publishing date
 20170325
 type
 Thesis
 publication status
 published
 subject
 keywords
 värderelationer, vaghet, paritet, ojämförbarhet, värdejämförelser, svåra jämförelser, transitivitet, kollapsprincipen, Value relations, vagueness, parity, incomparability, incommensurability, indeterminacy, value comparisons, hard cases of comparison, transitivity, the collapsing principle
 pages
 212 pages
 publisher
 Lund University (MediaTryck)
 defense location
 B336, LUX, Helgonavägen 3, Lund
 defense date
 20170325 10:15:00
 ISBN
 9789188473318
 9789188473325
 language
 English
 LU publication?
 yes
 id
 9bec2211a86849f3bac0c6659cce0279
 date added to LUP
 20170215 13:00:26
 date last changed
 20181121 21:29:49
@phdthesis{9bec2211a86849f3bac0c6659cce0279, abstract = {{This thesis explores whether the three standard value relations, “better than”, “worse than” and “equally as good”, exhaust the possibilities in which things can relate with respect to their value. Or more precisely, whether there are examples in which one of these relations is not instantiated. There are cases in which it is not obvious that one of these relations does obtain; these are referred to as “hard cases of comparison”. These hard cases of comparison become interesting, since if it not the case that the standard three value relations obtains in these cases then the three standard relations do not exhaust the possibility of instantiated value relations. It is argued that for some of the hard cases of comparison, the standard relations determinately obtain. For some it is indeterminate, due to vagueness, which of the three relations obtains, but it is determinate that one of them obtains. Thereafter it is argued that the influential Collapsing Argument fails in ruling out other accounts of the hard cases of comparison. Since one cannot depend on the Collapsing Argument in order to conclude that all items are related by the standard three relations, the investigation continues. It is argued that none of the hard cases of comparison are cases of incomparability. Furthermore, none of them are cases of a fourth basic positive value relation such as “parity”. Consequently, for all the hard cases of comparison one of the standard value relations holds, although sometimes we do not know which one and sometimes it is indeterminate which one holds. This means that there is no reason to assume that one of the standard three value relations does not hold between items we are comparing. This is followed by a brief discussion about the normative consequences of this result. The thesis ends with four different appendices in which related topics are discussed.}}, author = {{Andersson, Henrik}}, isbn = {{9789188473318}}, keywords = {{värderelationer, vaghet, paritet, ojämförbarhet, värdejämförelser, svåra jämförelser, transitivitet, kollapsprincipen; Value relations, vagueness, parity, incomparability, incommensurability, indeterminacy, value comparisons, hard cases of comparison, transitivity, the collapsing principle}}, language = {{eng}}, month = {{03}}, publisher = {{Lund University (MediaTryck)}}, school = {{Lund University}}, title = {{How It All Relates : Exploring the Space of Value Comparisons}}, url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/21475570/How_It_All_Relates_Exploring_the_Space_of_Value_Relations.pdf}}, year = {{2017}}, }