Commensurability (ethics)

In ethics, commensurability describes the concept that all values can be compared with one another. In contrast, incommensurability describes the point of view that some values are incomparable with one another.

Classically, a trichotomy of comparison operations for values is assumed, with which all relationships between values can be expressed. A value can be “better”, “worse”, or “equal to” another value. In order to refute the arguments for incommensurability, the trichotomy thesis is rejected by some authors. Add a fourth operator added, such as: "about the same" ( Roughly equal ) or "on a par" ( on a par ).

For certain ethical theories, such as utilitarianism , commensurability is a mandatory requirement.

definition

The discussion about value incommensurability was triggered by Joseph Raz , among others , who argued for incommensurability in his political work Morality of Freedom . He accepts the trichotomy thesis, i.e. assumes that there are only three comparison operators for values. His definition of incommensurability is:

"A and B are incommensurate if it is neither true that one is better than the other nor true that they are of equal value."

"A and B are incommensurable when it is neither true that one is better than the other, nor that they have the same worth."

- Raz 1986, p. 322

Joseph Raz uses the terms "incommensurability" and "incomparability" interchangeably. However, authors like Ruth Chang distinguish between incommensurability, on abstract values (z. B. liberty, equality) refers, and the incomparability of "carrier of values" ( bearers of value ), about various concrete careers.

Examples

The decision for a professional career was cited as examples of incommensurability. There are good reasons to become a lawyer or musician. Let's say one person doesn't think either of the alternatives is better than the other. If one proceeds from the trichotomy thesis and from commensurability, the following implausibility results : If one of the two options is improved even slightly (e.g. if one makes a career as a musician a little more successful), this becomes the only rational choice . That's because the original careers had the same value (since neither was better than the other), so improving one option makes it really better than the other.

Web links

Incommensurable Values in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

literature

Introduction. In: Ruth Chang (Ed.): Incommensurability, Incomparability, and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA et al. 1997, ISBN 0-674-44755-7 .
Joseph Raz : The Morality of Freedom. Clarendon Press, Oxford 1986, ISBN 0-19-824772-9 .

Individual evidence

↑ U. a. by Ruth Chang, Thomas Hurka and James Griffin . See: Introduction. In: Ruth Chang (Ed.): Incommensurability, Incomparability, and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA et al. 1997, p. 5.

[1] U. a. by Ruth Chang, Thomas Hurka and James Griffin . See: Introduction. In: Ruth Chang (Ed.): Incommensurability, Incomparability, and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA et al. 1997, p. 5.