David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (4):567–577 (2006)
Critics have persistently charged that indirect consequentialism, despite the best efforts of its defenders, ultimately fails to appropriately account for friendship in the face of the alienation generated by the harsh demands of consequentialism. Robert F. Card has recently alleged that the dispositional emphasis of indirect consequentialism renders its defender incapable of rejecting problematic friendships that are seriously suboptimal. I argue that Card's criticism not only fails to undermine indirect consequentialism, but in fact provides considerations that both help us to better understand the theory and ultimately weigh in favor of it over Card's own brand of sophisticated consequentialism.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Edmund Henden (2007). Restrictive Consequentialism and Real Friendship. Ratio 20 (2):179–193.
By Robert F. Card (2004). Consequentialism, Teleology, and the New Friendship Critique. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 85 (2):149–172.
Tim Mulgan (2001). The Demands of Consequentialism. Oxford University Press.
Joseph Mendola (2005). Consequentialism, Group Acts, and Trolleys. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 (1):64–87.
Robert Guay (2005). A Refutation of Consequentialism. Metaphilosophy 36 (3):348-362.
Douglas W. Portmore (2011). 7 Consequentialism. In Christian Miller (ed.), Continuum Companion to Ethics. Continuum. 143.
Brian McElwee (2010). The Rights and Wrongs of Consequentialism. Philosophical Studies 151 (3):393 - 412.
Dean Cocking & Justin Oakley (1995). Indirect Consequentialism, Friendship, and the Problem of Alienation. Ethics 106 (1):86-111.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads25 ( #57,509 of 1,006,224 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,735 of 1,006,224 )
How can I increase my downloads?