David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Economics and Philosophy 2 (2):159 (1986)
In recent decades, neoclassical economists have made heroic efforts to accommodate within the confines of the concept of rational utility maximization the fact that individual behavior is significantly affected by moral considerations. This article argues the merits of using an alternative approach: recognizing that individuals pursue at least two irreducible sources of value or “utility”, pleasure and morality. The possibility that some additional utilities may have to be recognized is explored. This raises the concern that conceptual anarchy will break out, which in turn will force a search for a common denominator, and thus a return to one overarching utility. Arguments are presented to show that this concern is unfounded. The main focus of the article is a criticism of the monoutility conception and a brief for separating the sense of discharging one's moral obligations from all other satisfactions. The article first deals with general conceptual points, and then cites both everyday observations and empirical evidence in support of this position
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Michael Walzer (1983). Spheres of Justice. Basic Books.
Amartya K. Sen (1977). Rational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioral Foundations of Economic Theory. Philosophy and Public Affairs 6 (4):317-344.
Jeremy Bentham (1780). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Dover Publications.
Ruth Benedict (1946). Patterns of Culture. Philosophical Review 55:497.
Citations of this work BETA
Jennifer Adelstein & Stewart Clegg (forthcoming). Code of Ethics: A Stratified Vehicle for Compliance. Journal of Business Ethics.
Thomas Tyson (1992). Does Believing That Everyone Else is Less Ethical Have an Impact on Work Behavior? Journal of Business Ethics 11 (9):707 - 717.
Karl-Dieter Opp (2013). Norms and Rationality. Is Moral Behavior a Form of Rational Action? Theory and Decision 74 (3):383-409.
D. W. Haslett (1990). What is Utility? Economics and Philosophy 6 (1):65.
Stephen Ellis (2006). Multiple Objectives: A Neglected Problem in the Theory of Human Action. Synthese 153 (2):313 - 338.
Similar books and articles
Timothy J. Brennan (1993). The Futility of Multiple Utility. Economics and Philosophy 9 (1):155.
Mark A. Lutz (1993). The Utility of Multiple Utility: A Comment on Brennan. Economics and Philosophy 9 (1):145.
George Graham (1999). Fuzzy Fault Lines: Selves in Multiple Personality Disorder. Philosophical Explorations 2 (3):159-174.
Peter Vallentyne (1993). Utilitarianism and Infinite Utility. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 71 (2):212 – 217.
Dan Mahoney (2011). A Comparison Of The Utility Theory Of Rothbard And Kirzner. Libertarian Papers 3.
Marcus G. Singer (2000). Mill's Stoic Conception of Happiness and Pragmatic Conception of Utility. Philosophy 75 (1):25-47.
Paul Weirich (2010). Utility and Framing. Synthese 176 (1):83 - 103.
Mark E. Yellin (2000). Indirect Utility, Justice, and Equality in the Political Thought of David Hume. Critical Review 14 (4):375-389.
Wesley Cooper (2008). Decision-Value Utilitarianism. Polish Journal of Philosophy 2 (2):39-50.
Eric Funkhouser (2007). A Liberal Conception of Multiple Realizability. Philosophical Studies 132 (3):467-494.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads11 ( #321,239 of 1,911,315 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #320,535 of 1,911,315 )
How can I increase my downloads?