超越功利主义

by Amartya Sen (Editor), Bernard Williams (Editor), 阿马蒂亚·森 (Editor)

本书收集了一些对功利主义的研究，既考虑作为个人道德理论的功利主义，也考虑了作为公共选择理论的功利主义。除了两篇论文以外，其他都是专为本书所作。

Genres: Philosophy, Economics, Nonfiction

332 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1982

About the author

Amartya Kumar Sen is an Indian economist who was awarded the 1998 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences for his contributions to welfare economics and social choice theory, and for his interest in the problems of society’s poorest members.

Sen was best known for his work on the causes of famine, which led to the development of practical solutions for preventing or limiting the effects of real or perceived shortages of food. He is currently the Thomas W. Lamont University Professor and Professor of Economics and Philosophy at Harvard University. He is also a senior fellow at the Harvard Society of Fellows and a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, where he previously served as Master from the years 1998 to 2004. He is the first Asian and the first Indian academic to head an Oxbridge college.

Amartya Sen's books have been translated into more than thirty languages. He is a trustee of Economists for Peace and Security. In 2006, Time magazine listed him under "60 years of Asian Heroes" and in 2010 included him in their "100 most influential persons in the world".

Reviews

[Noah Jones · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a fairly dense collection of academic articles clarifying, critiquing, and replacing utilitarianism. It gives a helpful view of the state of scholarship in philosophical ethics and economics in the 80s when it was published. The essays are of varying quality in style, argument, and personal interest to me. My favorite were:
Sen & Williams’ introduction
Hare, ‘Ethical theory and utilitarianism’
Harsanyi, ‘Morality and the theory of rational behaviour’
Scanlon, ‘Contractualism and utilitarianism’
Taylor, ‘The diversity of goods’
Hahn, ‘On some difficulties of the utilitarian economist’
Elster, ‘Sour grapes - utilitarianism and the genesis of wants’
Schick, ‘Under which descriptions?’

[Christopher · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Hampshire essay is by far the best.

[Leonardo]

Tiene un artículo de Elster que argumenta que lo que los individuos consideran como satisfacción no debería ser considerado un criterio de justicia, o de elección social.

Citado en Capabilities and Happiness Pág.145

[WaldenOgre · Rating 2 out of 5]

这个评分是针对这个译本，而非原文。我强烈怀疑，此书对于任何一个功利主义者而言，都是难以接受的：把一些原本或许会很有趣的文章翻译成一堆不知所谓的英式中文，怎么看都是“负效用”的典范啊。