David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ratio 16 (4):368–390 (2003)
sonable, in this sense, if we ignore, or give too little weight to, some other people's well-being or moral claims.' Some critics have suggested that, because Scanlon appeals to this sense of 'reasonable', his formula is empty. On this objection, whenever we believe that some act is wrong, we shall believe that people have moral claims not to be treated in this way. We could therefore argue that such acts are disallowed by some principle which no one could reasonably reject, since anyone who rejected this principle would be giving too little weight to people's moral claims not to be treated in this way. Since everyone could claim that the principles which they accept could not be reasonably rejected, Scanlon's Formula would make no difference to our moral thinking. That is not so. If we reject the principles that disallow certain acts, we are denying that such acts are wrong. This denial would be unreasonable if it would give too little weight to some other people's moral claims. So Scanlon's Formula implies that..
|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
Thomas Scanlon (1998). What We Owe to Each Other. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Iwao Hirose (2013). Aggregation and the Separateness of Persons. Utilitas 25 (2):182-205.
Michael Otsuka (2006). Saving Lives, Moral Theory, and the Claims of Individuals. Philosophy and Public Affairs 34 (2):109–135.
Barbara H. Fried (2012). Can Contractualism Save Us From Aggregation? Journal of Ethics 16 (1):39-66.
Nicholas Southwood (2009). Moral Contractualism. Philosophy Compass 4 (6):926-937.
Hon-Lam Li (2015). Contractualism and Punishment. Criminal Justice Ethics 34 (2):177-209.
Similar books and articles
T. M. Scanlon (2000). Intention and Permissibility, I. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74 (1):301–317.
Matthew Talbert (2006). Contractualism and Our Duties to Nonhuman Animals. Environmental Ethics 28 (2):201-215.
Philip Stratton-Lake (2003). Scanlon, Permissions, and Redundancy: Response to McNaughton and Rawling. Analysis 63 (4):332–337.
Philip Nickel (2001). Moral Testimony and its Authority. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 4 (3):253-266.
Eric Mack (2007). Scanlon as Natural Rights Theorist. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 6 (1):45-73.
Jussi Suikkanen (2005). Contractualist Replies to the Redundancy Objections. Theoria 71 (1):38-58.
Brad Hooker (2003). Contractualism, Spare Wheel, Aggregation. In Matt Matravers (ed.), Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy. Frank Cass 53-76.
Thomas Scanlon (2007). Structural Irrationality. In Geoffrey Brennan, Robert Goodin, Frank Jackson & Michael Smith (eds.), Common Minds: Themes From the Philosophy of Philip Pettit. Clarendon Press
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads130 ( #16,315 of 1,725,806 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #92,975 of 1,725,806 )
How can I increase my downloads?