Limited Aggregation is the view that when there are competing moral claims that demand our attention, we should sometimes satisfy the largest aggregate of claims, depending on the strength of the claims in question. In recent years, philosophers such as Patrick Tomlin and Alastair Norcross have argued that Limited Aggregation violates a number of rational choice principles such as Transitivity, Separability, and Contraction Consistency. Current versions of Limited Aggregation are what may be called Comparative Approaches because they involve assessing the relative strengths of various claims. In this paper, we offer a non-comparative version of Limited Aggregation, what we call the Threshold Approach. It states that there is a non-relative threshold that separates various claims. We demonstrate that the Threshold Approach does not violate rational choice principles such as Transitivity, Separability, and Contraction Consistency, and we show that potential concerns regarding such a view are surmountable.

中文翻译：

---

生命、四肢和肝斑：有限聚集的阈值方法

有限聚合是这样一种观点，即当存在需要我们注意的相互竞争的道德主张时，我们有时应该满足最大的主张集合，具体取决于相关主张的强度。近年来，帕特里克·汤姆林（Patrick Tomlin）和阿拉斯泰尔·诺克罗斯（Alastair Norcross）等哲学家认为，有限聚合违反了许多理性选择原则，例如传递性、可分离性和收缩一致性。有限聚合的当前版本可以称为比较方法，因为它们涉及评估各种主张的相对强度。在本文中，我们提供了有限聚合的非比较版本，我们称之为阈值方法。它指出存在一个非相对阈值来区分各种声明。我们证明阈值方法并不违反传递性、可分离性和收缩一致性等理性选择原则，并且我们证明对这种观点的潜在担忧是可以克服的。