We argue that all comparative expressions in natural language obey a principle that we call Comparability: if $x$ and $y$ are at least as $F$ as themselves, then either $x$ is at least as $F$ as $y$ or $y$ is at least as $F$ as $x$. This principle has been widely rejected among philosophers, especially by ethicists, and its falsity has been claimed to have important normative implications. We argue that Comparability is needed to explain the goodness of several patterns of inference that seem manifestly valid, that the purported failures of Comparability would have absurd consequences, and that the influential arguments against Comparability are less compelling than they may have initially seemed.

中文翻译：

---

可比性案例

我们认为自然语言中的所有比较表达式都遵循我们称之为可比性的原则：如果$X$和$是$至少是$F$作为他们自己，那么要么$X$至少是$F$作为$是$或者$是$至少是$F$作为$X$. 这一原则已被哲学家，尤其是伦理学家广泛拒绝，并且据称其虚假性具有重要的规范意义。我们认为，需要可比性来解释几种似乎明显有效的推理模式的优点，可比性的所谓失败会产生荒谬的后果，并且反对可比性的有影响力的论点并不像最初看起来那么有说服力。