Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Recent attempts to provide a viable account of decision making under normative uncertainty through the use of voting procedures seem promising, but incomparable options pose a challenge. This paper focuses on the so-called Borda approach to decision making under normative uncertainty (MacAskill, Mind 125(500):967–1004, 2016; MacAskill et al., Moral uncertainty, Oxford University Press, 2020) and illustrates how an extended version of it aimed at accommodating incomplete preference orderings associated with normative theories fails. I propose a different account for proponents fond of the voter-theoretic approach that is grounded by approval voting , which sufficiently addresses the problem of option incomparability and is pragmatically compelling due to its simpler structure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee Elkin (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: