Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. A New Argument Against Rule Consequentialism.Christopher Woodard - 2008 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 11 (3):247-261.
    We best understand Rule Consequentialism as a theory of pattern-based reasons, since it claims that we have reasons to perform some action because of the goodness of the pattern consisting of widespread performance of the same type of action in the same type of circumstances. Plausible forms of Rule Consequentialism are also pluralist, in the sense that, alongside pattern-based reasons, they recognise ordinary act-based reasons, based on the goodness of individual actions. However, Rule Consequentialist theories are distinguished from other pluralist (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • A Decision Theorist’s Bhagavad Gita.Harald Wiese - 2016 - Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research 33 (1):117-136.
    We analyze and interpret the Bhagavad Gītā from the point of view of decision theory. Arjuna asks Krishna for help in his decision of whether to fight or not. Broadly speaking, Arjuna prefers consequentialist arguments, while Krishna stresses the warrior’s svadharma. In doing so, Krishna can be considered to suggest a “new” twist on the standard decision model, in line with reason-based theories of choice. We also argue that Krishna’s svadharmic point of view can fruitfully be seen as an example (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A dilemma for rule-consequentialism.Jussi Suikkanen - 2008 - Philosophia 36 (1):141-150.
    Rule-consequentialists tend to argue for their normative theory by claiming that their view matches our moral convictions just as well as a pluralist set of Rossian duties. As an additional advantage, rule-consequentialism offers a unifying justification for these duties. I challenge the first part of the ruleconsequentialist argument and show that Rossian duties match our moral convictions better than the rule-consequentialist principles. I ask the rule-consequentialists a simple question. In the case that circumstances change, is the wrongness of acts determined (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Can consequentialism cover everything?Bart Streumer - 2003 - Utilitas 15 (2):237-47.
    Derek Parfit, Philip Pettit and Michael Smith defend a version of consequentialism that covers everything. I argue that this version of consequentialism is false. Consequentialism, I argue, can only cover things that belong to a combination of things that agents can bring about.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Right Motive, Wrong Action: Direct Consequentialism and Evaluative Conflict.Jennie Louise - 2006 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 9 (1):65-85.
    In this paper I look at attempts to develop forms of consequentialism which do not have a feature considered problematic in Direct Consequentialist theories (that is, those consequentialist theories that apply the criterion of rightness directly in the evaluation of any set of options). The problematic feature in question (which I refer to as ‘evaluative conflict’) is the possibility that, for example, a right motive might lead an agent to perform a wrong act. Theories aiming to avoid this phenomenon must (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Rawls and Cohen on facts and principles.A. Faik Kurtulmus - 2009 - Utilitas 21 (4):489-505.
    G. A. Cohen has recently argued for a thesis about the relationship between facts and principles. He claims that Rawls denies this thesis, and the truth of this thesis vitiates Rawls’s constructivist procedure. I argue against both claims by developing an account of Rawls’s justificatory strategy and the role of facts in this strategy, which I claim is similar to the role of facts in some defences of utilitarianism.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Rule Consequentialism and Scope.Leonard Kahn - 2012 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (5):631-646.
    Rule consequentialism (RC) holds that the rightness and wrongness of actions is determined by an ideal moral code, i.e., the set of rules whose internalization would have the best consequences. But just how many moral codes are there supposed to be? Absolute RC holds that there is a single morally ideal code for everyone, while Relative RC holds that there are different codes for different groups or individuals. I argue that Relative RC better meets the test of reflective equilibrium than (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Is God a Rule-consequentialist?William Hunt - 2022 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 14 (3):53-70.
    Prima facie, rule-consequentialism as a moral theory would correlate with the concerns of an omnibenevolent being should one exist. Indeed, such a being would be divine, and under the lenses of the three Abrahamic religions, would inter alia, also be omnipotent and omniscient. In this paper, I consider the attitude of such a being to rule-consequentialism in human society. I argue, from a probabilistic perspective, that the evidence of Abrahamic scripture confirms, to a degree, that God would judge rule-consequentialism to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Fittingness: The sole normative primitive.Richard Yetter Chappell - 2012 - Philosophical Quarterly 62 (249):684 - 704.
    This paper draws on the 'Fitting Attitudes' analysis of value to argue that we should take the concept of fittingness (rather than value) as our normative primitive. I will argue that the fittingness framework enhances the clarity and expressive power of our normative theorising. Along the way, we will see how the fittingness framework illuminates our understanding of various moral theories, and why it casts doubt on the Global Consequentialist idea that acts and (say) eye colours are normatively on a (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   102 citations  
  • Inconsistency and the theoretical commitments of Hooker's rule-consequentialism.Robert F. Card - 2007 - Utilitas 19 (2):243-258.
    Rule-consequentialism is frequently regarded as problematic since it faces the following powerful dilemma: either rule-consequentialism collapses into act-consequentialism or rule-consequentialism is inconsistent. Recent defenders of this theory such as Brad Hooker provide a careful response to this objection. By explicating the nature and theoretical commitments of rule-consequentialism, I contend that these maneuvers are not successful by offering a new way of viewing the dilemma which retains its force even in light of these recent discussions. The central idea is that even (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Sidgwick and Common–Sense Morality.Brad Hooker - 2000 - Utilitas 12 (3):347.
    This paper begins by celebrating Sidgwick's Methods of Ethics. It then discusses Sidgwick's moral epistemology and in particular the coherentist element introduced by his argument from common-sense morality to utilitarianism. The paper moves on to a discussion of how common-sense morality seems more appealing if its principles are formulated as picking out pro tanto considerations rather than all-things-considered demands. Thefinal section of the paper considers the question of which version of utilitarianism follows from Sidgwick's arguments.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Epistemic Teleology and the Separateness of Propositions.Selim Berker - 2013 - Philosophical Review 122 (3):337-393.
    When it comes to epistemic normativity, should we take the good to be prior to the right? That is, should we ground facts about what we ought and ought not believe on a given occasion in facts about the value of being in certain cognitive states (such as, for example, the value of having true beliefs)? The overwhelming answer among contemporary epistemologists is “Yes, we should.” This essay argues to the contrary. Just as taking the good to be prior to (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   164 citations  
  • Consequentialism.Walter Sinnott-Armstrong - 2019 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Global consequentialism and the morality and laws of war.Hilary Greaves - forthcoming - In McDermott and Roser Kuosmanen (ed.), Human rights and 21st century challenges. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
    Rights-based approaches and consequentialist approaches to ethics are often seen as being diametrically opposed to one another. In one sense, they are. In another sense, however, they can be reconciled: a ‘global’ form of consequentialism might supply consequentialist foundations for a derivative morality that is non-consequentialist, and perhaps rights-based, in content. By way of case study to illustrate how this might work, I survey what a global consequentialist should think about a recent dispute between Jeff McMahan and Henry Shue on (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark