David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Utilitas 15 (3):279 (2003)
Impartially Optimizing Consequentialism requires agents to act so as to bring about the best outcome, as judged by a preference ordering which is impartial among the needs and interests of all persons. IOC may seem to be only rational response to the recognition that one is only one person among many others with equal intrinsic moral status. A person who adopts a less impartial deontological alternative to IOC may seem to fail to take seriously the fact that other persons matter in the same way that she takes herself to matter. This paper examines this of IOC. It argues that IOC is not the only rational way to recognize the fact that each person matters. It presents an alternative conception of how to recognize the status of other persons as beingswho-matter, an alternative that has Kantian rather than consequentialist implications
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Alex Rajczi (2011). The Argument From Self-Creation: A Refutation of Act-Consequentialism and a Defense of Moral Options. American Philosophical Quarterly 48 (4):315.
Tim Mulgan (2001). The Demands of Consequentialism. Oxford University Press.
Matthew Wynia & American Association* (2006). Consequentialism and Outrageous Options: Response to Commentary on “Consequentialism and Harsh Interrogations”. American Journal of Bioethics 6 (2):W37-W37.
Philip Pettit & Geoffrey Brennan (1986). Restrictive Consequentialism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 64 (4):438 – 455.
Douglas W. Portmore, Chapter 5: Dual-Ranking Act-Consequentialism: Reasons, Morality, and Overridingness.
Sandra L. Borden (2000). Foreword. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 15 (3):147 – 148.
Douglas W. Portmore (2011). 7 Consequentialism. In Christian Miller (ed.), Continuum Companion to Ethics. Continuum 143.
Sandra L. Borden (2000). A Model for Evaluating Journalist Resistance to Business Constraints. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 15 (3):149 – 166.
Douglas W. Portmore (2011). Commonsense Consequentialism: Wherein Morality Meets Rationality. Oxford University Press.
Don Fallis (2007). Collective Epistemic Goals. Social Epistemology 21 (3):267 – 280.
Douglas W. Portmore (2003). Position‐Relative Consequentialism, Agent‐Centered Options, and Supererogation. Ethics 113 (2):303-332.
Peter Vallentyne (2006). Against Maximizing Act-Consequentialism (June 30, 2008). In James Dreier (ed.), Contemporary Debates in Moral Theories. Blackwell Publishers 6--21.
Douglas W. Portmore (2008). Dual-Ranking Act-Consequentialism. Philosophical Studies 138 (3):409 - 427.
Matthew Tedesco (2006). Indirect Consequentialism, Suboptimality, and Friendship. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (4):567–577.
Added to index2010-08-30
Total downloads37 ( #115,895 of 1,934,580 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #52,857 of 1,934,580 )
How can I increase my downloads?