A copy of this work was available on the public web and has been preserved in the Wayback Machine. The capture dates from 2007; you can also visit the original URL.
The file type is
The move to satisficing has been thought to help consequentialists avoid the problem of demandingness. But this is a mistake. In this paper I formulate several versions of satisficing consequentialism. I show that every version is unacceptable, because every version permits agents to bring about a submaximal outcome in order to prevent a better outcome from obtaining. Some satisficers try to avoid this problem by incorporating a notion of personal sacrifice into the view. I show that thesedoi:10.1017/s0953820806001877 fatcat:4m7ihv273ffwzeree336xm5oga