Philosophy East and West 58 (1):17-35 (2008)
|Abstract||: What kinds of comparisons can legitimately be made between Mahāyāna Buddhism and Western ethical theories? Mahāyānists aspire to alleviate the suffering, promote the happiness, and advance the moral perfection of all sentient beings. This aspiration is best understood as expressing a form of universalist consequentialism. Many Indian Mahāyāna texts seem committed to claims about agent-neutrality that imply consequentialism and are not compatible with virtue ethics. Within the Mahāyāna tradition, there is some diversity of views: Asaṅga seems to hold a complex and interesting version of rule consequentialism, whereas Śāntideva is closer to act consequentialism|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Douglas W. Portmore (forthcoming). Consequentialism and Moral Rationalism. Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics.
Tim Mulgan (2001). How Satisficers Get Away with Murder. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 9 (1):41 – 46.
Mark Schroeder (2007). Teleology, Agent‐Relative Value, and 'Good'. Ethics 117 (2):265-000.
Douglas W. Portmore (2005). Combining Teleological Ethics with Evaluator Relativism: A Promising Result. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 (1):95–113.
David W. Chappell (1996). Searching for a Mahāyāna Social Ethic. Journal of Religious Ethics 24 (2):351 - 375.
Michael Ridge (2001). Agent-Neutral Consequentialism From the Inside-Out: Concern for Integrity Without Self-Indulgence. Utilitas 13 (02):236-.
Douglas W. Portmore (2001). Can an Act-Consequentialist Theory Be Agent Relative? American Philosophical Quarterly 38 (4):363-77.
Campbell Brown (2011). Consequentialize This. Ethics 121 (4):749-771.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads37 ( #31,833 of 548,973 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #19,222 of 548,973 )
How can I increase my downloads?