Normative political theorists frequently compare hypothetical scenarios for the purpose of identifying reasons to prefer one kind of institution to alternatives. We examine three types of "unfair" comparisons and the reasoning errors associated with each. We then show how a modeling mindset can help theorists detect and avoid the three types of error, using a reconstruction of Cohen's (2009) camping trip thought experiment to illustrate the approach.

Location: RSSS room 6.71

Paper title, details for accessing the paper and session details will be circulated through the Philsoc-l mailing list, which you can subscribe to here.