I evaluate two contractualist approaches to the ethics of risk: mutual constraint and the probabilistic, ex ante approach. After explaining how these approaches address problems in earlier interpretations of contractualism, I object that they fail to respond to diverse risk preferences in populations. Some people could reasonably reject the risk thresholds associated with these approaches. A strategy for addressing this objection is considering individual risk preferences, similar to those Buchak discusses concerning expected-utility approaches to risk. I defend the risk-preferences-adjusted (RISPREAD) contractualist approach, which calculates a population’s average risk preference and permits risk thresholds below that preference, only.

我评估了风险伦理的两种契约主义方法：相互约束和概率的、事前的方法。在解释了这些方法如何解决早期契约主义解释中的问题后，我反对它们未能对人群中不同的风险偏好做出反应。有些人可以合理地拒绝与这些方法相关的风险阈值。解决这一反对意见的一种策略是考虑个人风险偏好，类似于布查克讨论的有关风险预期效用方法的那些。我捍卫风险偏好调整 (RISPREAD) 契约主义方法，该方法计算人口的平均风险偏好并仅允许低于该偏好的风险阈值。