Philosophical Papers 33 (1):1-10 (2004)
|Abstract||Abstract Agent-based virtue ethics is a unitary normative theory according to which the moral status of actions is entirely dependent upon the moral status of an agent's motives and character traits. One of the problems any such approach faces is to capture the common-sense distinction between an agent's doing the right thing, and her doing it for the right (or wrong) reason. In this paper I argue that agent-based virtue ethics ultimately fails to capture this kind of fine-grained distinction, and to this extent ought to be rejected. I focus first on Michael Slote's agent-based theory, according to which the moral status of actions depends upon an agent's actual motives, and argue that this leads to a paradox. I then consider whether the ?counterfactual? version of agent-basing favoured by Rosalind Hursthouse and Linda Zagzebski fares any better, and conclude that it does not|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Daniel Doviak (2011). A New Form of Agent-Based Virtue Ethics. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (3):259-272.
Liezl van Zyl (2011). Rightness and Goodness in Agent-Based Virtue Ethics. Journal of Philosophical Research 36:103-114.
Daniel Jacobson (2002). An Unsolved Problem for Slote's Agent-Based Virtue Ethics. Philosophical Studies 111 (1):53 - 67.
Michelle Ciurria (2012). A New Mixed View of Virtue Ethics, Based on Daniel Doviak's New Virtue Calculus. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (2):259-269.
Michael Slote (1999). Moral Theories and Virtue Ethics. The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 1:51-57.
Damian Cox (2006). Agent-Based Theories of Right Action. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 9 (5):505 - 515.
Sean McAleer (2010). Four Solutions to the Alleged Incompleteness of Virtue Ethics. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 4:1-20.
Z. Y. L. van (2011). Right Action and the Non-Virtuous Agent. Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (1):80-92.
Liezl van Zyl (2011). Right Action and the Non-Virtuous Agent. Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (1):80-92.
Sherman (2006). Wisdom and Action Guidance in the Agent-Based Virtue Ethics of Aristotle. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 80 (4):481-506.
S. J. Thomas Sherman (2006). Wisdom and Action Guidance in the Agent-Based Virtue Ethics of Aristotle. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 80 (4):481-506.
Lara Denis (2006). Sex and the Virtuous Kantian Agent. In Raja Halwani (ed.), Sex and Ethics: Essays in Sexuality, Virtue, and the Good Life. Palgrave Macmillan.
Michael Slote (1995). Agent-Based Virtue Ethics. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 20 (1):83-101.
Douglas W. Portmore (2001). Can an Act-Consequentialist Theory Be Agent Relative? American Philosophical Quarterly 38 (4):363-77.
Added to index2010-08-24
Total downloads39 ( #29,721 of 548,973 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,799 of 548,973 )
How can I increase my downloads?