Redeeming Relative Value: Indexicality and Consequentializing Agent‐Centered Norms

ABSTRACT Robert Nozick doubted forms of consequentialism that employ so‐called “agent‐relative value” because he found them “gimmicky.” This doubt has been sharpened by Don Regan, Mark Schroeder, and others into the objection that agent‐relative value lacks the practical importance we associate with good simpliciter . This sharpened objection has prompted agent‐relative consequentialists to replace the agent‐relative value at the foundation of their view with agent‐relative reasons for desire. This paper argues for two claims. First, the turn to agent‐relative reasons is less promising than it seems. Second, concerns about gimmickiness can be allayed directly by showing how standard decision‐theoretic conceptions of outcomes already relativize what agents evaluate without relativizing value itself.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Noûs
Published
2026-09-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.70065
Primary Topic
Philosophical Ethics and Theory
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Redeeming Relative Value: Indexicality and Consequentializing Agent‐Centered Norms

Nathan Robert Howard
Noûs
Philosophical Ethics and Theory
article

Redeeming Relative Value: Indexicality and Consequentializing Agent‐Centered Norms

Nathan Robert Howard
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Robert Nozick doubted forms of consequentialism that employ so‐called “agent‐relative value” because he found them “gimmicky.” This doubt has been sharpened by Don Regan, Mark Schroeder, and others into the objection that agent‐relative value lacks the practical importance we associate with good simpliciter . This sharpened objection has prompted agent‐relative consequentialists to replace the agent‐relative value at the foundation of their view with agent‐relative reasons for desire. This paper argues for two claims. First, the turn to agent‐relative reasons is less promising than it seems. Second, concerns about gimmickiness can be allayed directly by showing how standard decision‐theoretic conceptions of outcomes already relativize what agents evaluate without relativizing value itself.

Noûs
University of Toronto (CA)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Philosophical Ethics and Theory
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.