Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

TRANSCENDENTAL ARGUMENTS AND INTERPERSONAL UTILITY COMPARISONS

  • Mauro Rossi (a1)
Abstract

According to the orthodox view, it is impossible to know how different people's preferences compare in terms of strength and whether they are interpersonally comparable at all. Against the orthodox view, Donald Davidson (1986, 2004) argues that the interpersonal comparability of preferences is a necessary condition for the correct interpretation of other people's behaviour. In this paper I claim that, as originally stated, Davidson's argument does not succeed because it is vulnerable to several objections, including Barry Stroud's (1968) objection against all transcendental arguments of a ‘strong’ kind. However, I argue that Davidson's strategy can still achieve results of anti-sceptical significance. If we reformulate Davidson's argument as a ‘modest’ transcendental argument and if we embrace an ‘internal’ account of epistemic justification, it is in fact possible to have at least justified beliefs about how different people's preferences compare in terms of strength and about their interpersonal comparability.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Arrow, K. 1963. Social Choice and Individual Values. New York: Wiley.
Binmore, K. 2009. Interpersonal comparison of utility. In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Economics, eds. Kincaid, H. and Ross, D., 540559. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bradley, R. 2007. Comparing evaluations. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 108: 85100.
Dancy, J. 1985. An Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Davidson, D. 1984. Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Davidson, D. 1986. Judging interpersonal interests. In Foundations of Social Choice Theory, eds. Elster, J. and Hylland, A., 195211. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davidson, D. 2003. Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Davidson, D. 2004. Problems of Rationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dennett, D. 1987. The Intentional Stance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Feldman, R. and Conee, E. 1985. Evidentialism. Philosophical Studies 48: 1534.
Goldman, A. 1989. Interpretation psychologised. Mind and Language 4: 161185.
Goldman, A. 2006. Simulating Minds. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Grandy, R. 1973. Reference, meaning, and belief. Journal of Philosophy 70: 439452.
Griffin, J. 1986. Well-Being: Its Meaning, Measurement, and Moral Importance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hammond, P. 1991. Interpersonal comparisons of utility: why and how they are and should be made. In Interpersonal Comparisons of Well-Being, ed. Elster, J. and Roemer, J., 200254. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harsanyi, J. 1955. Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility. Journal of Political Economy 63: 309321.
Harsanyi, J. 1977. Rational Behaviour and Bargaining Equilibrium in Games and Social Situations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hausman, D. 1995. The impossibility of interpersonal utility comparisons. Mind 104: 473490.
Isbell, J. 1959. Absolute games. In Contributions to the Theory of Games, ed. Tucker, A.W. and Luce, R.D.357396. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Jeffrey, R. 1971. On interpersonal utility theory. Journal of Philosophy 68: 647656.
List, L. 2003. Are interpersonal comparisons of utility indeterminate? Erkenntnis 58: 229260.
Lepore, E. and Ludwig, K. 2005. Donald Davidson. Meaning, Truth, Language, and Reality. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
McGinn, C. 1977. Charity, interpretation, and belief. Journal of Philosophy 74: 521535.
Ramsey, F. 1926. Truth and probability. Reprinted in Philosophical Papers, ed. Mellor, D.H., 1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rawls, J. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Robbins, L. 1932. An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science. London: Macmillan.
Schick, F. 1971. Beyond utilitarianism. Journal of Philosophy 68: 657666.
Sen, A. 1970. Collective Choice and Social Welfare. San Francisco, CA: Holden-Day.
Sen, A. 1979. Interpersonal comparisons of welfare. In Economics and Human Welfare: Essays in Honor of Tibor Scitovsky, ed. Boskin, M.J.183201. New York: Academic Press.
Sosa, E. 1988. Beyond scepticism, to the best of our knowledge. Mind 97: 153188.
Stern, R. 1999. Transcendental Arguments: Problems and Prospects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stern, R. 2000. Transcendental Arguments and Scepticism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Stroud, B. 1968. Transcendental arguments. Journal of Philosophy 65: 241256.
Stroud, B. 2002. Understanding Human Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
von Neumann, J. & Morgenstern, O. 1944. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Waldner, I. 1972. The empirical meaningfulness of interpersonal utility comparisons. Journal of Philosophy 4: 87103.
Weintraub, R. 1995. The impossibility of interpersonal utility comparisons: a critical note. Mind 105: 661665.
Weintraub, R. 1998. Do utility comparisons pose a problem? Philosophical Studies 92: 307319.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Economics & Philosophy
  • ISSN: 0266-2671
  • EISSN: 1474-0028
  • URL: /core/journals/economics-and-philosophy
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed