David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Economics and Philosophy 14 (01):51- (1998)
The concept of well-being is central to the subject matter of moral philosophy as well as economics. According to some moral theorists morality is about the maximization of social well-being. According to others, notably John Rawls we ought to give particular priority to the worst off members in society. Both these and other moral positions, whatever the priority they attach to different members of society in arriving at moral judgements, require an account of well-being or advantage. The concern with well-being is thus of foundational importance in moral philosophy, even if well-being is not thought of as all that matters. Furthermore, those who want to distinguish ‘morality’ from ‘self-interest’ must furnish us with an account of human interests, so that we can distinguish the moral realm from that of self-interest or prudence. The concerns of moral philosophers, here, clearly overlap with those of economists. Economists are much concerned with questions of how well people are doing, with their ‘standard of living’ or ‘quality of life’. However, there are very different ways of thinking about each of these ideas. Indeed, we need to discriminate between different views of the quality of life and to decide which is the most appropriate for the purposes of moral theory and the normative parts of economics
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Melanie Walker (2010). Critical Capability Pedagogies and University Education. Educational Philosophy and Theory 42 (8):898-917.
Prabhir Vishnu Poruthiyil (2013). Weaning Business Ethics From Strategic Economism: The Development Ethics Perspective. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 116 (4):735-749.
Similar books and articles
Peter Cook (1998). Thinking the Concept Otherwise. Symposium: The Canadian Journal of Continental Philosophy 2 (1):23-35.
Wilfried Ver Eecke (2007). The Concept of Merit Good in Economic Theory. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 5:181-186.
Bert Gordijn (1999). The Troublesome Concept of the Person. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 20 (4):347-359.
Robert Wachbroit (1994). Normality as a Biological Concept. Philosophy of Science 61 (4):579-591.
Frances Howard-Snyder (1999). Response to Carlson and Qizilbash. Utilitas 11 (01):106-111.
Mark McCullagh (2011). How to Use a Concept You Reject. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (243):293-319.
Mozaffar Qizilbash (1995). Obligation, Human Frailty, and Utilitarianism. Utilitas 7 (01):145-.
Martine Nida-Rumelin (2006). Grasping Phenomenal Properties. In Torin Alter & Sven Walter (eds.), Phenomenal Concepts and Phenomenal Knowledge: New Essays on Consciousness and Physicalism. Oxford University Press.
Mozaffar Qizilbash (2007). The Parity View and Intuitions of Neutrality. Economics and Philosophy 23 (1):107-114.
Mozaffar Qizilbash (1998). Editorial Introduction: Impurity, Authenticity and Humanity. Angelaki 3 (1):1-7.
Janet L. Travis (1971). A Criticism of the Use of the Concept of "Dominant Group" in Arguments for Evolutionary Progressivism. Philosophy of Science 38 (3):369-375.
I. L. Humberstone (1997). Two Types of Circularity. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 57 (2):249-280.
Ignacio Jané (2006). What is Tarski's Common Concept of Consequence? Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 12 (1):1-42.
Added to index2010-09-14
Total downloads14 ( #126,172 of 1,413,330 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #154,079 of 1,413,330 )
How can I increase my downloads?