David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Perspectives 23 (1):305-319 (2009)
In our everyday moral deliberations, we attend to two central types of considerations – outcomes and moral rules. How these considerations interrelate is central to the long-standing debate between deontologists and utilitarians. Is the weight we attach to moral rules reducible to their conduciveness to good outcomes (as many utilitarians claim)? Or do we take moral rules to be absolute constraints on action that normatively trump outcomes (as many deontologists claim)? Arguments over these issues characteristically appeal to commonsense intuitions about various cases. As a result, an important portion of the debate involves empirically tractable questions — questions that can be investigated by probing for people’s judgments in cases in which the two types of considerations come into conflict with one another.
|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
Robert Nozick (1974). Anarchy, State and Utopia. Basic Books.
Immanuel Kant (1996). Practical Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
R. M. Hare (1981). Moral Thinking: Its Levels, Method, and Point. Oxford University Press.
John Rawls (2009). A Theory of Justice. In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Philosophy and Rhetoric. Oxford University Press 133-135.
John Jamieson Carswell Smart & Bernard Williams (1973). Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Joshua May (2014). Moral Judgment and Deontology: Empirical Developments. Philosophy Compass 9 (11):745-755.
Jennifer L. Zamzow (2015). Rules and Principles in Moral Decision Making: An Empirical Objection to Moral Particularism. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18 (1):123-134.
Nicole Hassoun (2014). Global Justice and Charity: A Brief for a New Approach to Empirical Philosophy. Philosophy Compass 9 (12):884-893.
Similar books and articles
Douglas W. Portmore (2011). Commonsense Consequentialism: Wherein Morality Meets Rationality. Oxford University Press.
Michael B. Gill & Shaun Nichols (2008). Sentimentalist Pluralism: Moral Psychology and Philosophical Ethics. Philosophical Issues 18 (1):143-163.
Zachary Silver (2006). Epistemic Side Constraints and the Structure of Epistemic Normativity. Southern Journal of Philosophy 44 (1):129-153.
Denis G. Arnold (2003). Libertarian Theories of the Corporate and Global Capitalism. Journal of Business Ethics 48 (2):155-173.
Steven Sverdlik (2004). Intentionality and Moral Judgments in Commonsense Thought About Action. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 24 (2):224-236.
Florian Cova & Hichem Naar (2012). Side-Effect Effect Without Side Effects: The Pervasive Impact of Moral Considerations on Judgments of Intentionality. Philosophical Psychology 25 (6):837-854.
James McBain (2005). Moral Theorizing and Intuition Pumps; Or, Should We Worry About People’s Everyday Intuitions About Ethical Issues? The Midwest Quarterly 46 (3):268-283.
Douglas W. Portmore (2000). Commonsense Morality and Not Being Required to Maximize the Overall Good. Philosophical Studies 100 (2):193-213.
Added to index2009-12-08
Total downloads83 ( #56,825 of 1,940,986 )
Recent downloads (6 months)13 ( #66,703 of 1,940,986 )
How can I increase my downloads?