21 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Donald Hubin (Ohio State University)
  1. Donald C. Hubin (2013). Fatherhood. In Hugh LaFollette (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Ethics. Wiley-Blackwell.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Donald C. Hubin (2012). Human Reproductive Interests: Puzzles at the Periphery of the Property Paradigm. Social Philosophy and Policy 29 (1):106-125.
    The question of ownershipis important in addressing many issues of public policy. But the attempt to subsume all questions of rights under what I describe as exerts a distorting influence on debates about a variety of complex moral issues. More specifically, I argue that the application of the property paradigm deformed discussion of the nature and basis of parental rights. The claim that parental rights are not best understood as property rights is now widely acknowledged. However, while the property paradigm (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Louise Antony, William Lane Craig, John Hare, Donald C. Hubin, Paul Kurtz, C. Stephen Layman, Mark C. Murphy, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong & Richard Swinburne (2009). Is Goodness Without God Good Enough?: A Debate on Faith, Secularism, and Ethics. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Donald C. Hubin (2008). The Limits of Consequentialism. Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 10:167-176.
    Modern consequentialism is a very broad theory. Consequentialists can invoke a distribution sensitive theory of value to address the issues of distributive justice that bedeviled utilitarianism. They can attach intrinsic moral value to such acts truth-telling and promise-keeping and, so, acknowledge the essential moral significance of such acts in a way that classical utilitarianism could not. It can appear that there are no limits to consequentialism’s ability to respond to the criticisms against utilitarian theories by embracing a sophisticated theory of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Donald C. Hubin (2003). Desires, Whims, and Values. Journal of Ethics 7 (3):315-35.
    Neo-Humean instrumentalists hold that an agent’s reasons for acting are grounded in the agent’s desires. Numerous objections have been leveled against this view, but the most compelling concerns the problem of “alien desires” – desires with which the agent does not identify. The standard version of neo-Humeanism holds that these desires, like any others, generate reasons for acting. A variant of neo-Humeanism that grounds an agent’s reasons on her values, rather than all of her desires, avoids this implication, but at (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Donald C. Hubin (2001). The Groundless Normativity of Instrumental Rationality. Journal of Philosophy 98 (9):445-468.
    Neo-Humean instrumentalist theories of reasons for acting have been presented with a dilemma: either they are normatively trivial and, hence, inadequate as a normative theory or they covertly commit themselves to a noninstrumentalist normative principle. The claimed result is that no purely instrumentalist theory of reasons for acting can be normatively adequate. This dilemma dissolves when we understand what question neo-Humean instrumentalists are addressing. The dilemma presupposes that neo-Humeans are attempting to address the question of how to act, 'simpliciter'. Instead, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Donald C. Hubin (1999). Converging on Values. Analysis 59 (264):355–361.
    In 'The Moral Problem', Michael Smith defends a conception of normative reasons that is nonrelative. Given his understanding of normative reasons, nonrelativity commits him to the convergence hypothesis: that, as a result of the process or correction of beliefs and rational deliberation, 'all' agents would converge on having the same set of desires. I develop several reasons for being pessimistic about the truth of this hypothesis. As a result, if normative reasons exist, we have a reason to be skeptical of (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Donald C. Hubin (1999). Parental Rights and Due Process. The Journal of Law and Family Studies 1 (2):123-150.
    The U.S. Supreme Court regards parental rights as fundamental. Such a status should subject any legal procedure that directly and substantively interferes with the exercise of parental rights to strict scrutiny. On the contrary, though, despite their status as fundamental constitutional rights, parental rights are routinely suspended or revoked as a result of procedures that fail to meet even minimal standards of procedural and substantive due process. This routine and cavalier deprivation of parental rights takes place in the context of (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Donald C. Hubin (1999). What's Special About Humeanism. Noûs 33 (1):30-45.
    One of the attractions of the Humean instrumentalist theory of practical rationality is that it appears to offer a special connection between an agent's reasons and her motivation. The assumption that Humeanism is able to assert a strong connection between reason and motivation has been challenged, most notably by Christine Korsgaard. She argues that Humeanism is not special in the connection it allows to motivation. On the contrary, Humean theories of practical rationality do connect reasons and motivation in a unique (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Donald C. Hubin & Karen Haely (1999). Rape and the Reasonable Man. Law and Philosophy 18 (2):113 - 139.
    Standards of reasonability play an important role in some of the most difficult cases of rape. In recent years, the notion of the reasonable person has supplanted the historical concept of the reasonable man as the test of reasonability. Contemporary feminist critics like Catharine MacKinnon and Kim Lane Scheppele have challenged the notion of the reasonable person on the grounds that reasonability standards are gendered to the ground and so, in practice, the reasonable person is just the reasonable man (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Donald C. Hubin (1996). Hypothetical Motivation. Noûs 30 (1):31-54.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Donald C. Hubin (1995). Book Review:The Nature of Rationality. Robert Nozick. [REVIEW] Ethics 105 (3):659-.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Donald C. Hubin (1995). Book Review:Moral Reasons. Jonathan Dancy. [REVIEW] Ethics 106 (1):187-.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Donald C. Hubin (1995). Review of Dancy's Moral Reasons. [REVIEW] Ethics 106 (1):187-189.
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Donald C. Hubin (1994). The Moral Justification of Benefit/Cost Analysis. Economics and Philosophy 10 (02):169-.
    Some have attempted to justify benefit/ cost analysis by appealing to a moral theory that appears to directly ground the technique. This approach is unsuccessful because the moral theory in question is wildly implausible and, even if it were correct, it would probably not endorse the unrestricted use of benefit/ cost analysis. Nevertheless, there is reason to think that a carefully restricted use of benefit/ cost analysis will be justifiable from a wide variety of plausible moral perspectives. From this, it (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Donald C. Hubin (1993). Book Review:Thoughtful Economic Man: Essays on Rationality, Moral Rules and Benevolence. Gay Meeks. [REVIEW] Ethics 103 (3):572-.
    Some have attempted to justify benefit/ cost analysis by appealing to a moral theory that appears to directly ground the technique. This approach is unsuccessful because the moral theory in question is wildly implausible and, even if it were correct, it would probably not endorse the unrestricted use of benefit/ cost analysis. Nevertheless, there is reason to think that a carefully restricted use of benefit/ cost analysis will be justifiable from a wide variety of plausible moral perspectives. From this, it (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Donald C. Hubin (1991). Irrational Desires. Philosophical Studies 62 (1):23 - 44.
    Many believe that the rational evaluation of actions depends on the rational evaluation of even basic desires. Hume, though, viewed desires as "original existences" which cannot be contrary to either truth or reason. Contemporary critics of Hume, including Norman, Brandt and Parfit, have sought a basis for the rational evaluation of desires that would deny some basic desires reason-giving force. I side with Hume against these modern critics. Hume's concept of rational evaluation is admittedly too narrow; even basic desires are, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Donald C. Hubin (1991). Non-Tuism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 21 (4):441 - 468.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Donald C. Hubin & Mark B. Lambeth (1988). Providing for Rights. Dialogue 27 (03):489-.
    Gauthier's version of the Lockean proviso (in Morals by Agreement) is inappropriate as the foundation for moral rights he takes it to be. This is so for a number of reasons. It lacks any proportionality test thus allowing arbitrarily severe harms to others to prevent trivial harms to oneself. It allows one to inflict any harm on another provided that if one did not do so, someone else would. And, by interpreting the notion of bettering or worsening one's position in (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Donald C. Hubin (1986). Review: Of Bindings and By-Products: Elster on Rationality. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Public Affairs 15 (1):82 - 95.
  21. Michael Perkins & Donald C. Hubin (1986). Self-Subverting Principles of Choice. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 16 (1):1 - 10.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation