Suppositional Desires and Rational Choice Under Moral Uncertainty

This paper presents a unifying diagnosis of a number of important problems facing existing models of rational choice under moral uncertainty and proposes a remedy. I argue that the problems of (i) severely limited scope, (ii) intertheoretic comparisons, and (iii) 'swamping’ all stem from the wa...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Nicholas Makins
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Michigan Publishing 2025-04-01
Series:Ergo, An Open Access Journal of Philosophy
Online Access:https://journals.publishing.umich.edu/ergo/article/id/7303/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850267034534805504
author Nicholas Makins
author_facet Nicholas Makins
author_sort Nicholas Makins
collection DOAJ
description This paper presents a unifying diagnosis of a number of important problems facing existing models of rational choice under moral uncertainty and proposes a remedy. I argue that the problems of (i) severely limited scope, (ii) intertheoretic comparisons, and (iii) 'swamping’ all stem from the way in which values are assigned to options in decision rules such as Maximisation of Expected Choiceworthiness. By assigning values to options under a given moral theory by asking something like “how much do I desire this option, supposing this theory is true?” rather than “how much value does this theory assign to this option?” these problems can be avoided, while the appealing features of these accounts can be preserved. This amendment provides a role for the preferences, desires, or goals of rational agents that is curiously absent from the existing discussion of what individuals rationally ought to do when they are uncertain about what they morally ought to do.
format Article
id doaj-art-2c917180cc314c80aa85f59a2afe61a1
institution OA Journals
issn 2330-4014
language English
publishDate 2025-04-01
publisher Michigan Publishing
record_format Article
series Ergo, An Open Access Journal of Philosophy
spelling doaj-art-2c917180cc314c80aa85f59a2afe61a12025-08-20T01:53:57ZengMichigan PublishingErgo, An Open Access Journal of Philosophy2330-40142025-04-0112010.3998/ergo.7303Suppositional Desires and Rational Choice Under Moral UncertaintyNicholas Makins0Philosophy, King's College LondonThis paper presents a unifying diagnosis of a number of important problems facing existing models of rational choice under moral uncertainty and proposes a remedy. I argue that the problems of (i) severely limited scope, (ii) intertheoretic comparisons, and (iii) 'swamping’ all stem from the way in which values are assigned to options in decision rules such as Maximisation of Expected Choiceworthiness. By assigning values to options under a given moral theory by asking something like “how much do I desire this option, supposing this theory is true?” rather than “how much value does this theory assign to this option?” these problems can be avoided, while the appealing features of these accounts can be preserved. This amendment provides a role for the preferences, desires, or goals of rational agents that is curiously absent from the existing discussion of what individuals rationally ought to do when they are uncertain about what they morally ought to do.https://journals.publishing.umich.edu/ergo/article/id/7303/
spellingShingle Nicholas Makins
Suppositional Desires and Rational Choice Under Moral Uncertainty
Ergo, An Open Access Journal of Philosophy
title Suppositional Desires and Rational Choice Under Moral Uncertainty
title_full Suppositional Desires and Rational Choice Under Moral Uncertainty
title_fullStr Suppositional Desires and Rational Choice Under Moral Uncertainty
title_full_unstemmed Suppositional Desires and Rational Choice Under Moral Uncertainty
title_short Suppositional Desires and Rational Choice Under Moral Uncertainty
title_sort suppositional desires and rational choice under moral uncertainty
url https://journals.publishing.umich.edu/ergo/article/id/7303/
work_keys_str_mv AT nicholasmakins suppositionaldesiresandrationalchoiceundermoraluncertainty