The separateness of persons, distributive norms, and moral theory

Abstract

Utilitarianism aggregates interests, balancing benefits to some against harms to others, so as to produce the best outcome. Whereas aggregation may be acceptable within a life, it may seem unacceptable across different lives. The separateness of persons, contractualism claims, requires distributions that are acceptable, in the relevant sense, to each. If so, the separateness of persons both undermines the distributional implications of utilitarianism and motivates an egalitarian form of contractualism. However, I deny this. A version of utilitarianism that aggregates but gives priority to the worse- off is compatible with the separateness of persons, and a suitable contractual agreement cannot be anti- aggressive.