Theory and Decision

, Volume 55, Issue 1, pp 1-44

First online:

Is the Person-Affecting Intuition Paradoxical?

  • Melinda A. RobertsAffiliated withCollege of New Jersey

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access


This article critically examines some of the inconsistency objections that have been put forward by John Broome, Larry Temkin and others against the so-called "person-affecting," or "person-based," restriction in normative ethics, including "extra people" problems and a version of the nonidentity problem from Kavka and Parfit. Certain Pareto principles and a version of the "mere addition paradox" are discussed along the way. The inconsistencies at issue can be avoided, it is argued, by situating the person-affecting intuition within a non-additive form of maximizing consequentialism – a theory which then competes with such additive, or aggregative, forms of maximizing consequentialism as "totalism" and "averagism."

Consequentialism utilitarianism person-affecting intuition mere addition paradox total utilitarianism average utilitarianism Parfit future persons