  In their article, "Egalitarianism under Severe Uncertainty", Philosophy and
Public Affairs, 46:3, 2018, Thomas Rowe and Alex Voorhoeve develop an original
moral decision theory for cases under uncertainty, called "pluralist
egalitarianism under uncertainty". In this paper, I firstly sketch their views
and arguments. I then elaborate on their moral decision theory by discussing
how it applies to choice scenarios in health ethics. Finally, I suggest a new
two-stage Ellsberg thought experiment challenging the core of the principle of
their theory. In such an experiment pluralist egalitarianism seems to suggest
the wrong, morally and rationally speaking, course of action -- no matter
whether I consider my thought experiment in a simultaneous or a sequential
setting.
