Skip to main content
Log in

The Moral Relevance of Cost

  • Published:
Philosophical Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Consequentialists do not deny that cost to the agent is a morallyrelevant consideration. For, they do include cost to the agent inthe calculation of the overall good. What they deny, however, isthat cost to the agent is a morally relevant factor independentlyof its impact on the overall good. I argue in this paper that, ifone rejects the claim that cost to the agent is a morallyrelevant factor on its own right, one is then committed toaccepting some `hyper' counter-intuitive moral claims. I callthese claims hyper counter-intuitive because they are at a moreextreme level of counter-intuitiveness than the ones usuallyassociated with consequentialism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haydar, B. The Moral Relevance of Cost. Philosophical Studies 112, 127–134 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022582325326

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022582325326

Keywords

Navigation