This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
30 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
  1. Richard Arneson (2003). Consequentialism Vs. Special-Ties Partiality. The Monist 86 (3):382-401.
    Richard J. Arneson Word count 6932 Most people believe that partiality toward those near and dear to us is morally required. Parents ought to favor their own children over other people’s children, and friends ought to favor each other over strangers. Partiality toward extended kin, fellow clan members, co-nationals, neighbors, members of one’s own community, and other affiliates is often affirmed, though it is controversial or at least unclear just what sorts of social relationship generate obligations of partiality.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. David O. Brink (1986). Utilitarian Morality and the Personal Point of View. Journal of Philosophy 83 (8):417-438.
    Consideration of the objection from the personal point of view reveals the resources of utilitarianism. The utilitarian can offer a partial rebuttal by distinguishing between criteria of rightness and decision procedures and claiming that, because his theory is a criterion of rightness and not a decision procedure, he can justify agents' differential concern for their own welfare and the welfare of those close to them. The flexibility in utilitarianism's theory of value allows further rebuttal of this objection; objective versions of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. By Robert F. Card (2004). Consequentialism, Teleology, and the New Friendship Critique. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 85 (2):149–172.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Dean Cocking & Justin Oakley (1995). Indirect Consequentialism, Friendship, and the Problem of Alienation. Ethics 106 (1):86-111.
    In this article we argue that the worries about whether a consequentialist agent will be alienated from those who are special to her go deeper than has so far been appreciated. Rather than pointing to a problem with the consequentialist agent's motives or purposes, we argue that the problem facing a consequentialist agent in the case of friendship concerns the nature of the psychological disposition which such an agent would have and how this kind of disposition sits with those which (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. E. Conee (2001). Friendship and Consequentialism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 79 (2):161 – 179.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Damian Cox (2005). Integrity, Commitment, and Indirect Consequentialism. Journal of Value Inquiry 39 (1):61-73.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. George Graham & Hugh LaFollette (1986). Honesty and Intimacy. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships.
    Current professional and lay lore overlook the role of honesty in developing and sustaining intimate relationships. We wish to assert its importance. We begin by analyzing the notion of intimacy. An intimate encounter or exchange, we argue, is one in which one verbally or non-verbally privately reveals something about oneself, and does so in a sensitive, trusting way. An intimate relationship is one marked by regular intimate encounters or exchanges. Then, we consider two sorts of cases where it is widely (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. George W. Harris (1989). A Paradoxical Departure From Consequentialism. Journal of Philosophy 86 (2):90-102.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Bennett W. Helm, Friendship. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Friendship, as understood here, is a distinctively personal relationship that is grounded in a concern on the part of each friend for the welfare of the other, for the other's sake, and that involves some degree of intimacy. As such, friendship is undoubtedly central to our lives, in part because the special concern we have for our friends must have a place within a broader set of concerns, including moral concerns, and in part because our friends can help shape who (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Edmund Henden (2007). Restrictive Consequentialism and Real Friendship. Ratio 20 (2):179–193.
    A familiar objection to restrictive consequentialism is that a restrictive consequentialist is incapable of having true friendships. In this paper I distinguish between an instrumentalist and a non-instrumentalist version of this objection and argue that while the restrictive consequentialist can answer the non-instrumentalist version, restrictive consequentialism may still seem vulnerable to the instrumentalist version. I then suggest a consequentialist reply that I argue also works against this version of the objection. Central to this reply is the claim that a restrictive (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Brad Hooker (2010). When is Impartiality Morally Appropriate? In Brian Feltham & John Cottingham (eds.), Partiality and Impartiality: Morality, Special Relationships, and the Wider World. Oup Oxford.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Thomas Hurka (2006). Value and Friendship: A More Subtle View. Utilitas 18 (3):232-242.
    T. M. Scanlon has cited the value of friendship in arguing against a ‘teleological’ view of value which says that value inheres only in states of affairs and demands only that we promote it. This article argues that, whatever the teleological view's final merits, the case against it cannot be made on the basis of friendship. The view can capture Scanlon's claims about friendship if it holds, as it can consistently with its basic ideas, that (i) friendship is a higher-level (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Frank Jackson (1991). Decision-Theoretic Consequentialism and the Nearest and Dearest Objection. Ethics 101 (3):461-482.
  14. Neera Badhwar Kapur (1991). Why It is Wrong to Be Always Guided by the Best: Consequentialism and Friendship. Ethics 101 (3):483.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Neera Badhwar Kapur (1991). Why It is Wrong to Be Always Guided by the Best: Consequentialism and Friendship. Ethics 101 (3):483-504.
    I take friendship to be a practical and emotional relationship marked by mutual and (more-or-less) equal goodwill, liking, and pleasure. Friendship can exist between siblings, lovers, parent and adult child, as well as between otherwise unrelated people. Some friendships are valued chiefly for their usefulness. Such friendships are instrumental or means friendships. Other friendships are valued chiefly for their own sakes. Such friendships are noninstrumental or end friendships. In this paper I am concerned only with end friendships, and the challenge (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Joel J. Kupperman (1980). Vulgar Consequentialism. Mind 89 (355):321-337.
  17. Brian Lightbody (2008). Indecidability and Undecidability: Does Derrida’s Ethics Depend on Levinas’ Notion of the Third? In Neal DeRoo & Brian Lightbody (eds.), The Logic of Incarnation. James K.A. Smith’s Critique of Postmodern Religion.
  18. Elinor Mason (1999). Do Consequentialists Have One Thought Too Many? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2 (3):243-261.
    In this paper I defend consequentialism against the objection that consequentialists are alienated from their personal relationships through having inappropriate motivational states. This objection is one interpretation of Williams' claim that consequentialists will have "one thought too many". Consequentialists should cultivate dispositions to act from their concern for others. I argue that having such a disposition is consistent with a belief in consequentialism and constitutes an appropriate attitude to personal relationships. If the consequentialist has stable beliefs that friendship is justifiable (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Elinor Mason (1998). Can an Indirect Consequentialist Be a Real Friend? Ethics 108 (2):386-393.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. F. Scott McElreath (2006). Maximizing Act Consequentialism and Friendship. Journal of Value Inquiry 40 (4):413-420.
  21. Alastair Norcross (1997). Consequentialism and Commitment. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):380–403.
    It is sometimes claimed that a consequentialist theory such as utilitarianism has problems accommodating the importance of personal commitments to other people. However, by emphasizing the distinction between criteria of rightness and decision procedures, a consequentialist can allow for non-consequentialist decision procedures, such as acting directly on the promptings of natural affection. Furthermore, such non-consequentialist motivational structures can co-exist happily with a commitment to consequentialism. It is possible to be a self-reflective consequentialist who has genuine commitments to individuals and to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Peter Railton (1984). Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality. Philosophy and Public Affairs 13 (2):134-171.
    The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. John Jamieson Carswell Smart & Bernard Williams (1973). Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge University Press.
    Two essays on utilitarianism, written from opposite points of view, by J. J. C. Smart and Bernard Williams. In the first part of the book Professor Smart advocates a modern and sophisticated version of classical utilitarianism; he tries to formulate a consistent and persuasive elaboration of the doctrine that the rightness and wrongness of actions is determined solely by their consequences, and in particular their consequences for the sum total of human happiness. This is a revised version of Professor Smart's (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Michael Smith (2009). Consequentialism and the Nearest and Dearest Objection. In Ian Ravenscroft (ed.), Minds, Ethics, and Conditionals: Themes from the Philosophy of Frank Jackson. Oxford University Press.
    Imagine that Bloggs is faced with a choice between giving a benefit to his child, or a slightly greater benefit to a complete stranger. The benefit is whatever the child or the stranger can buy for $100 — Bloggs has $100 to give away — and it just so happens that the stranger would buy something from which he would gain a slightly greater benefit than would Bloggs's child. Let's stipulate that Bloggs believes this to be, and let's stipulate, as (...)
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Michael Smith (2009). Minds, Ethics, and Conditionals: Themes From the Philosophy of Frank Jackson. Oxford University Press.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Michael Smith (2001). Immodest Consequentialism and Character. Utilitas 13 (02):173-.
    The fact that we place the value that we do on the traits of character constitutive of being a good friend, and the acts that good friends are disposed to perform, creates a considerable problem for what I call . The problem is, in essence, that the very best that the immodest global consequentialists can do by way of vindicating our most deeply held convictions about the value of these traits of character and actions isn't good enough, because, while vindicating (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Matthew Tedesco (2006). Indirect Consequentialism, Suboptimality, and Friendship. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (4):567–577.
    Critics have persistently charged that indirect consequentialism, despite the best efforts of its defenders, ultimately fails to appropriately account for friendship in the face of the alienation generated by the harsh demands of consequentialism. Robert F. Card has recently alleged that the dispositional emphasis of indirect consequentialism renders its defender incapable of rejecting problematic friendships that are seriously suboptimal. I argue that Card's criticism not only fails to undermine indirect consequentialism, but in fact provides considerations that both help us to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Eric Wiland (2007). How Indirect Can Indirect Utilitarianism Be? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (2):275-301.
    Most act-utilitarians now reject the direct utilitarianism of Bentham. They do so because they are convinced of what I call the paradox of utilitarianism -- the thought that one cannot maximize happiness if one is trying to maximize happiness. Instead, they adopt some form of indirect utilitarianism (IU), arguing that the optimal decision procedure may differ markedly from the criterion of rightness for actions. Here I distinguish between six different versions of indirect utilitarianism, arguing that the weaker versions of IU (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Bernard Williams (1988). Consequentialism and Integrity. In Samuel Scheffler (ed.), Consequentialism and its Critics. Oxford University Press. 20--50.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Bernard Williams (1981). Persons, Character, and Morality. In James Rachels (ed.), Moral Luck. Cambridge University Press.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation