Philosophy Compass 4 (2):329-347 (2009)
|Abstract||A growing trend of thought has it that any plausible nonconsequentialist theory can be consequentialized, which is to say that it can be given a consequentialist representation. In this essay, I explore both whether this claim is true and what its implications are. I also explain the procedure for consequentializing a nonconsequentialist theory and give an account of the motivation for doing so.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Douglas W. Portmore (2001). Can an Act-Consequentialist Theory Be Agent Relative? American Philosophical Quarterly 38 (4):363-77.
Eric Wiland (2010). The Incoherence Objection in Moral Theory. Acta Analytica 25 (3):279-284.
Michael Davis (2009). Punishment Theory's Golden Half Century: A Survey of Developments From (About) 1957 to 2007. Journal of Ethics 13 (1):73 - 100.
S. Matthew Liao (2008). Who Is Afraid of Numbers? Utilitas 20 (04):447-.
Jeffrey Friedman (1998). The Libertarian Straddle: Rejoinder to Palmer and Sciabarra. Critical Review 12 (3):359-388.
Jussi Suikkanen (2009). Consequentialism, Constraints and The Good-Relative-To: A Reply to Mark Schroeder. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy.
Benjamin Sachs (2010). Consequentialism's Double-Edged Sword. Utilitas 22 (3):258-271.
Douglas W. Portmore (2011). Commonsense Consequentialism: Wherein Morality Meets Rationality. Oxford University Press.
Douglas W. Portmore (2007). Consequentializing Moral Theories. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 88 (1):39–73.
Added to index2009-02-27
Total downloads88 ( #8,087 of 549,090 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #15,152 of 549,090 )
How can I increase my downloads?