A radical rejection of spectrum arguments

Abstract Spectrum arguments are purported to show that the betterness relation is not a transitive relation. This is a drastic conclusion since much normative theorizing and everyday reasoning assume that betterness is transitive. In order to avoid this conclusion, many reject a plausible view on trade-offs between quality and quantity. The rejection can take the form of a radical or a conservative rejection. The radical rejection seemingly deviates more from the underlying intuition of the view than the conservative rejection. In this paper, I will argue that it is, nevertheless, more plausible to opt for a radical rejection. This will be done by showing how appeals to non-conventional value relations, such as parity and incomparability, that are associated with conservative rejection, will not provide a satisfying response to spectrum arguments.