Utilitarianism versus the Repugnant Conclusion

Juan Cordoba

ISU General Staff Papers from Iowa State University, Department of Economics

Abstract: An influential body of literature has challenged the suitability of utilitarianism as a criterion for population ethics. Parfit's (1984) Repugnant Conclusion posits that utilitarianism favors the existence of large, impoverished societies. Dasgupta's (2005, 2019) calibrated models provide support for this conclusion. However, this paper demonstrates that these findings can be overturned by considering alternative, plausible assumptions. For instance, a wealthy society with a small population can be consistent with utilitarianism. The paper argues that utilitarianism offers a reliable benchmark for population ethics.

Date: 2023-02-24
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-upt
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstre ... 1d137d4f3da6/content
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 403 Forbidden

Related works:
Journal Article: Utilitarianism versus the repugnant conclusion (2023)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:isu:genstf:202302241652330000

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in ISU General Staff Papers from Iowa State University, Department of Economics Iowa State University, Dept. of Economics, 260 Heady Hall, Ames, IA 50011-1070. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Curtis Balmer ().