•  293
    Prioritarianism and the Levelling Down Objection
    Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (2): 197-206. 2011.
    I discuss Ingmar Persson’s recent argument that the Levelling Down Objection could be worse for prioritarians than for egalitarians. Persson’s argument depends upon the claim that indifference to changes in the average prioritarian value of benefits implies indifference to changes in the overall prioritarian value of a state of affairs. As I show, however, sensible conceptions of prioritarianism have no such implication. Therefore prioritarians have nothing to fear from the Levelling Down Object…Read more
  •  164
    The division of moral labour and the basic structure restriction
    Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (2): 173-199. 2009.
    Justice makes demands upon us. But these demands, important though they may be, are not the only moral demands that we face. Our lives ought to be responsive to other values too. However, some philosophers have identified an apparent tension between those values and norms, such as justice, that seem to transcend the arena of small-scale interpersonal relations and those that are most at home in precisely that arena. How, then, are we to engage with all of the values and norms that we take to app…Read more
  •  124
    In Defence of the Priority View
    Utilitas 24 (3): 349-364. 2012.
    In their paper ‘Why It Matters That Some Are Worse Off Than Others: An Argument against the Priority View’, Michael Otsuka and Alex Voorhoeve argue that prioritarianism is mistaken. I argue that their case against prioritarianism has much weaker foundations than it might at first seem. Their key argument is based on the claim that prioritarianism ignores the fact of the ‘separateness of persons’. However, prioritarianism, far from ignoring that fact, is a plausible response to it. It may be that…Read more
  •  31
  •  22
    The Liberal Archipelago
    Contemporary Political Theory 8 (3): 365-367. 2009.
  •  2
    Porter replies to a review of Ayn Rand's Theory of Knowledge by Carolyn Ray ("Porter's Rand: A Commentary," The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, Fall 2001). He argues that Ray misunderstands his book because she assumes it needn't be read from the beginning
  • Reply To Carolyn Ray:How Not To Read A Book
    Journal of Ayn Rand Studies 4 (8): 405-410. 2002.
    TOM PORTER replies to a review of Ayn Rand’s Theory of Knowledge by Carolyn Ray . He argues that Ray misunderstands his book because she assumes it needn’t be read from the beginning