ABSTRACT

I respond here to an argument given recently in this journal by Erik Carlson, Jens Johansson, and Olle Risberg. The authors object to the counterfactual comparative account of harm. They argue that, on this account, an action that would harm the agent might leave her better off than would some alternative action that would benefit her, and they object to this implication. By appealing to group or plural harm, I argue that their objection fails.

中文翻译：

---

弊大于利：回复 Carlson、Johansson 和 Risberg

摘要

我在此回应 Erik Carlson、Jens Johansson 和 Olle Risberg 最近在本期刊中提出的一个论点。作者反对危害的反事实比较说明。他们争辩说，基于这个原因，一个会伤害代理人的行动可能会让她的境况好于一些有利于她的替代行动，他们反对这种暗示。通过诉诸集体或多元伤害，我认为他们的反对是失败的。