Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (3):297 - 308 (2007)
|Abstract||This paper argues that many leading ethical theories are incomplete, in that they fail to account for both right and wrong. It also argues that some leading ethical theories are inconsistent, in that they allow that an act can be both right and wrong. The paper also considers responses on behalf of the target theories.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Hartry Field (2006). Truth and the Unprovability of Consistency. Mind 115 (459):567 - 605.
Willie E. Hopkins, Shirley A. Hopkins & Bryant C. Mitchell (2008). Ethical Consistency in Managerial Decisions. Ethics and Behavior 18 (1):26 – 43.
Stefano Berardi (1999). Intuitionistic Completeness for First Order Classical Logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic 64 (1):304-312.
Mark Colyvan, Damian Cox & Katie Steele (forthcoming). Modelling the Moral Dimension of Decisions. Noûs 44 (3):503-529.
David Copp (ed.) (2006). The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. Oxford University Press.
Jennie Louise (2006). Right Motive, Wrong Action: Direct Consequentialism and Evaluative Conflict. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 9 (1):65 - 85.
Gregory H. Moore (1997). Hilbert and the Emergence of Modern Mathematical Logic. Theoria 12 (1):65-90.
Pekka Väyrynen (2006). Ethical Theories and Moral Guidance. Utilitas 18 (3):291-309.
Jacob Ross (2006). Rejecting Ethical Deflationism. Ethics 116 (4):742-768.
Enrico Moriconi (2003). On the Meaning of Hilbert's Consistency Problem (Paris, 1900). Synthese 137 (1-2):129 - 139.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads36 ( #32,993 of 549,067 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #15,099 of 549,067 )
How can I increase my downloads?