4 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Matthew Tedesco (Beloit College)
  1. Matthew Tedesco (2011). Intuitions and the Demands of Consequentialism. Utilitas 23 (1):94-104.
    One response to the demandingness objection is that it begs the question against consequentialism by assuming a moral distinction between what a theory requires and what it permits. According to the consequentialist, this distinction stands in need of defense. However, this response may also beg the question, this time at the methodological level, regarding the credibility of the intuitions underlying the objection. The success of the consequentialist's response thus turns on the role we assign to intuitions in our moral methodology. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Matthew Tedesco (2007). Thomson's Samaritanism Constraint. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 14 (2):112-126.
    Judith Jarvis Thomson concludes “A Defense of Abortion” with a discussion of samaritanism. Whereas her rights-based arguments demonstrate the moral permissibility of virtually all abortions, this new consideration of samaritanism provides grounds for morally objecting to certain abortions that are otherwise morally pemissible given strictly rights-based considerations. I argue, first, that this samaritanism constraint on the moral permissibility of abortion involves an appeal to virtue-theoretical considerations. I then show why this hybridization of rights-based considerations and virtue-theoretical considerations has advantages over (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Matthew Tedesco (2006). Indirect Consequentialism, Suboptimality, and Friendship. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (4):567–577.
    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 (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Matthew Tedesco (2002). Theism, Naturalistic Evolution and the Probability of Reliable Cognitive Faculties. Philo 5 (2):235-241.
    In his recent book Warranted Christian Belief (2000), Alvin Plantinga argues that the defender of naturalistic evolution is faced with adefeater for his position: as products of naturalistic evolution, we have no way of knowing if our cognitive faculties are in fact reliably aimed at the truth. This defeater is successfully avoided by the theist in that, given theism, we can be reasonably secure that out cognitive faculties are indeed reliable. I argue that Plantinga’s argument is ultimately based on a (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation