Non-consequentialism and universalizability

Abstract

If non-consequentialists are to embrace the requirement of universalizability, then they will have to adopt a surprisingly relativistic stance. Not only will they say, in familiar vein, that the premises adduced in moral argument may only be agent-relative in force, that is, may involve the use of an indexical - as in the consideration that this or that option would advance my commitments, discharge my duty, or benefit my children - and may provide reasons only for the indexically relevant agent: in this case, me. They will also have to construe the consideration adduced in typical moral conclusions, to the effect that this or that option is right or ought to be chosen or whatever, as itself only agent-relative in force. © The Editors of The Philosophical Quarterly, 2000.