I agree with the earlier post concerning utilitarianism regarding the size of the group we are discussing. I believe any argument regarding groups becomes more difficult when the group gets larger (unless the problem is something like trying to eat 50 pizzas in 10 minutes and 15 people are participating-then it's better to have a larger group than 15). In examining the Pogge's argument thus far, it seems his aim is at measuring human flourishing in an attempt to gauge justice. His proposition to make a universal definition of justice is a noble notion but one which would be difficult to attain and maintain, if not impossible (in fact, more likely the latter). As much as I would like to see all people to agree with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the realist in me says it cannot be done. In order for such global uniformity to occur, there would need to be a catastrophic event or the rise of one world government with no state interest as a motive. I like the theory he is working on-it just can't be done, unless he has a convincing argument later to persuade me otherwise.