Social Philosophy and Policy 9 (02):1- (1992)
|Abstract||Suppose that the ultimate point of ethics is to make the world a better place. If it is, we must face the question: better in what respect? If the good is prior to the right that is, if the rationale for all requirements of the right is that they serve to further the good in one way or another then what is this good? Is there a single fundamental value capable of underlying and unifying all of our moral categories? If so, how might it defeat the claims of rival candidates for this role? If not, is there instead a plurality of basic goods, each irreducible to any of the others? In that case, how do they fit together into a unified picture of the moral life?These are the questions I wish to address, in a necessarily limited way. To many the questions will seem hopelessly old-fashioned or misguided. Some deontologists will wish to reverse my ordering of the good and the right, holding that the right constrains acceptable conceptions of the good. For many contractarians, neither the good nor the right will seem normatively basic, since both are to be derived from a prior conception of rationality. Finally, some theorists will reject the classification of moral theories in terms of their basic normative categories, arguing that the whole foundationalist enterprise in ethics should be abandoned.In the face of these challenges to the priority of the good, and in light of the many current varieties of moral skepticism and relativism, I cannot provide a very convincing justification for raising the questions I intend to discuss|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Noah Lemos (2004). Rational Desire and the Good. Business Ethics Quarterly 14 (2):329-336.
Imtiaz Moosa (2002). Does the Failure of Utilitarianism Justify a Belief in Intrinsic Value? Philo 5 (2):123-142.
Jason Raibley (2013). Health and Well-Being. Philosophical Studies 165 (2):469-489.
Juha Räikkä (2008). Conspiracy Theories and Ethics. Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 50:651-659.
Brad Hooker (1991). Theories of Welfare, Theories of Good Reasons for Action, and Ontological Naturalism. Philosophical Papers 20 (1):25-36.
Joanne B. Ciulla (1995). Leadership Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly 5 (1):5-28.
Stephan Hartmann (2001). Effective Field Theories, Reductionism and Scientific Explanation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 32 (2):267-304.
Peter Vallentyne (1988). Teleology, Consequentialism, and the Past. Journal of Value Inquiry 22 (2):89-101.
Bryan Frances (forthcoming). Philosophical Renegades. In Jennifer Lackey & David Christensen (eds.), The Epistemology of Disagreement: New Essays. OUP.
Julian Fink (2007). Is the Right Prior to the Good? South African Journal of Philosophy 26 (2):143-149.
Chris Daly & David Liggins (2010). In Defence of Error Theory. Philosophical Studies 149 (2):209-230.
Jeffrey A. Barrett (2003). Are Our Best Physical Theories (Probably and/or Approximately) True? Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1206-1218.
Added to index2010-08-31
Total downloads15 ( #85,924 of 722,826 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,826 )
How can I increase my downloads?