PhilArchive
open access
Moral uncertainty, expected choiceworthiness, and variance normalization
Many philosophers have recently defended the Maximise Expected Choiceworthiness (MEC) approach to moral uncertainty. Perhaps the most important problem for MEC is the problem of intertheoretic choiceworthiness unit comparisons; and one extant response to this problem is a technique called ‘variance normalization.’ Although there has been some short, scattered commentary on variance normalization in the philosophical literature, nobody has yet offered a detailed critical discussion of this proposal. This paper fills that lacuna, arguing that there are serious problems which would need to be addressed before variance normalization could be invoked to rescue MEC from scepticism about intertheoretic comparisons.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- How Moral Uncertaintism Can Be Both True and Interesting#766838
- Moral Uncertainty and Its Consequences#776555
- Non-ideal prescriptions for the morally uncertain#739918
- An Ethics of Uncertainty#756803
- Moral intuitionism and disagreement#700992
Record · ID 714131
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive