Supererogation for utilitarianism
Graduate studies at Western
American Philosophical Quarterly 47 (4):299 - 319 (2010)
|Abstract||Many believe that traditional consequentialist moral theories are incapable of incorporating the allegedly important phenomenon of supererogation. After surveying the “ties at the top,” “satisficing,” and “egoistic-adjustment” strategies to avoid the supererogation objection, I argue that a recent formulation of utilitarianism incorporating the self-other asymmetry exhibits interesting supererogatory properties. I then incorporate this asymmetry into a version of egoistically-adjusted act utilitarianism, arguing that such a view exhibits very rich supererogatory properties, properties that should assuage the theoretical worries of a vast number of supererogation critics|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Clay Splawn (2001). “The Self-Other Asymmetry and Act Utilitarianism.”. Utilitas 13 (3):323-333.
Jason Kawall (2005). Promising and Supererogation. Philosophia 32 (1-4):389-398.
David Heyd (1982). Supererogation: Its Status in Ethical Theory. Cambridge University Press.
Douglas W. Portmore, Chapter 5: Dual-Ranking Act-Consequentialism: Reasons, Morality, and Overridingness.
Jason Kawall (2009). Virtue Theory, Ideal Observers, and the Supererogatory. Philosophical Studies 146 (2):179-96.
Gregory Mellema (1996). Is It Bad to Omit an Act of Supererogation? Journal of Philosophical Research 21:405-416.
Wlodek Rabinowicz (2000). Kotarbinski's Early Criticism of Utilitarianism. Utilitas 12 (01):79-.
Douglas W. Portmore (forthcoming). Supererogation. In J. E. Crimmins & D. C. Long (eds.), Encyclopedia of Utilitarianism.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads30 ( #46,469 of 739,519 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?