Carl Knight argues that lexical sufficientarianism, which holds that sufficientarian concerns should have lexical priority over other distributive goals, is ‘excessive’ in many distinct ways and that sufficientarians should either defend weighted sufficientarianism or become prioritarians. In this article, I distinguish three types of weighted sufficientarianism and propose a weighted sufficientarian view that meets the excessiveness objection and is preferable to both Knight’s proposal and prioritarianism. More specifically, I defend a multi-threshold view which gives weighted priority to benefits directly above and below its thresholds, but gives benefits below the lowest threshold lexical priority over benefits above the highest threshold.

卡尔·奈特认为，词汇充足论认为充足论者的关注应该比其他分配目标具有词汇优先权，这种观点在许多不同方面都是“过度的”，充足论者要么捍卫加权充分论，要么成为优先论者。在本文中，我区分了三种类型的加权充分主义，并提出了一种加权充分主义观点，该观点满足过度反对意见，并且优于奈特的提议和优先主义。更具体地说，我捍卫一种多阈值观点，该观点对直接高于和低于其阈值的福利给予加权优先级，但给予低于最低阈值的福利词汇优先于高于最高阈值的福利。