[michael-ax]

now you're touching on the limits of knowledge of those making choices and might be tempted to rate them. that's out of scope for the deciders at that level, the parents in that story. ... the point is that they know the situation best. and that utility lets them quantify the subjective to test-run the rationalizations going into their decisions.

e.g. "maximising sum(log(utility))" like the comment on the article said. the only thing strange here is that philosophy deals with qualitative, not just quantitative domains. thus they tell these stories. :)

[vannevar]

True, but the parents in the story are imaginary---their decision-making is not being tested. Rather, it's the observer who is being tested. But the story is so contrary to experience that is does not do what the premise of the article suggests it does: distinguish observers that care more about equality than utility. Because the premise is flawed (ie, that this is a valid test), it tends to moot the rest of the article drawn from that premise.