Journal of Philosophical Research 16:407-410 (1991)
The “paradox of deontology” depends partly upon ignoring the special responsibility each person has for her own actions, and partly upon ignoring the essential differences between refraining from X and persuading another to refrain. But only in part; the paradoxical situations schematized by Shaw can occasionally occur. When they do, his pragmatic defense of deontology is sound
|Keywords||Contemporary Philosophy General Interest|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Deontology and Defeat.Michael Bergmann - 2000 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60 (1):87-102.
Combining Teleological Ethics with Evaluator Relativism: A Promising Result.Douglas W. Portmore - 2005 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 (1):95–113.
Teleology, Deontology, and the Priority of the Right: On Some Unappreciated Distinctions.Miriam Ronzoni - 2010 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 13 (4):453 - 472.
In Defense of Deontology and Kant: A Reply to Van Staveren.Mark D. White - 2009 - Review of Political Economy 21 (2):315-323.
The Practice of Medical Ethics: A Structuralistic Approach.William J. Ellos - 1984 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 5 (3).
Added to index2011-12-02
Total downloads55 ( #92,898 of 2,153,857 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #225,089 of 2,153,857 )
How can I increase my downloads?