Calvin Baker
\nPrinceton University<\/p>\n
According to Finite Fine-grainedness (roughly), there is a finite sequence of intuitively small differences between any two welfare levels. The assumption of Finite Fine-grainedness is essential to Gustaf Arrhenius\u2019s favored sixth impossibility theorem in population axiology and plays an important role in the spectrum argument for the (Negative) Repugnant Conclusion. I argue that Therav\u0101da Buddhists will deny Finite Fine-grainedness and consider the space that doing so opens up\u2014and fails to open up\u2014in population axiology. I conclude with a lesson for population axiology that generalizes beyond the Buddhist context: to plausibly deny Finite Fine-grainedness, we must locate a welfare good\u2014such as the good of awakening (bodhi<\/em>)\u2014with some rather esoteric axiological properties. Read article<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" ISSN 1076-9005 Volume 32, 2025 Therav\u0101da Buddhism, Finite Fine-grainedness, and the Repugnant Conclusion Calvin Baker Princeton University According to Finite Fine-grainedness (roughly), there is a finite sequence of intuitively small differences between any two welfare levels. The assumption of Finite Fine-grainedness is essential to Gustaf Arrhenius\u2019s favored sixth impossibility theorem in population axiology and plays … Continue reading Therav\u0101da Buddhism and Levels of Welfare<\/span>