Many consequentialists argue that you ought to do your part in collective action problems like climate change mitigation because (i) all such problems are triggering cases and (ii) doing your part in a triggering case maximizes expected value. I show that both (i) and (ii) are false: some triggering cases cannot be solved by appeal to expected value, since they involve infinities, and some collective action problems are not triggering cases, since they involve parity. Nonetheless, consequentialism will still prohibit failure to do your part in many collective action problems where we believe that so acting would be impermissible.

中文翻译：

---

结果主义和集体行动

许多后果论者认为，您应该在气候变化减缓等集体行动问题中尽自己的一份力量，因为 (i) 所有这些问题都是触发案例，(ii) 在触发案例中尽自己的一份力量可以最大化预期价值。我证明 (i) 和 (ii) 都是错误的：一些触发案例不能通过诉诸期望值来解决，因为它们涉及无穷大，而一些集体行动问题不是触发案例，因为它们涉及平价。尽管如此，后果主义仍然会禁止在我们认为不允许这样做的许多集体行动问题中不尽自己的一份力量。