Graduate studies at Western
Australasian Journal of Philosophy 50 (1):17 – 19 (1972)
|Abstract||D. H. Hodgson has argued that among highly knowledgeable and rational act-Utilitarians there is no non-Circular reason to be truthful or to expect truthfulness from others; wherefore these utilitarians forfeit the benefits of communication. I reply that hodgson goes wrong by tacitly assuming that his utilitarians have no premises to reason from except those that hodgson lays down in specifying the example under consideration|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
David Phillips (2011). Sidgwickian Ethics. Oxford University Press.
Thomas L. Carson (1983). Utilitarianism and the Wrongness of Killing. Erkenntnis 20 (1):49 - 60.
M. Podro (2010). Literalism and Truthfulness in Painting. British Journal of Aesthetics 50 (4):457-468.
Thomas L. Carson (2010). Lying and Deception: Theory and Practice. Oxford University Press.
Seow Ting Lee (2011). Understanding Truth in Health Communication. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 26 (4):263-282.
Michael Rescorla (2007). A Linguistic Reason for Truthfulness. In Dirk Greimann & Geo Siegwart (eds.), Truth and Speech Acts. Routledge.
Paolo Casalegno (2005). Truth and Truthfulness Attributions. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 105 (3):295–320.
Lubomira Radoilska (2008). Truthfulness and Business. Journal of Business Ethics 79 (1/2):21 - 28.
David Lewis (1972). Utilitarianism and Truthfulness. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 50 (1):17-19.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads36 ( #38,135 of 739,367 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,367 )
How can I increase my downloads?