ABSTRACT: It has been argued that a surprisingly wide range of theories of distributive ethics are

insensitive to catastrophic risk, including both ex ante and ex post versions of egalitarianism,

as well as utilitarianism and generalisations thereof, including prioritarianism.

The main aim of this paper is to show that all of these arguments are based on a

misunderstanding of the bad of catastrophe. I argue that there is nothing intrinsically

bad about a catastrophe, qua catastrophe; and I show that this suces to make all of

the aforementioned theories consistent with aversion to catastrophic risk.