Does the total principle have any repugnant implications?

Abstract

Recently a number of philosophers have suggested that the ’total principle’ does not imply the ‘repugnant conclusion’ provided that a certain axiological view (namely, the ‘discontinuity view’) is correct. Nevertheless, as I point out, there are three different versions of the ‘repugnant conclusion’, and it appears that the ’total principle’ will imply two of the three even if the ‘discontinuity view’ is correct. I then go on to argue that one of the two remaining versions turns out not to be repugnant after all. Second, I argue that the last remaining version is not, as it turns out, implied by the ’total principle’. Thus, my arguments show that the ’total principle’ has no repugnant implications. (edited)