Utilitas 32 (1):1-18 (2020)

Authors
Ben Eggleston
University of Kansas
Abstract
Most arguments in support of act utilitarianism are elaborations of one of two basic strategies. One is the consequentialist strategy. This strategy relies on the consequentialist premise that an act is right if and only if it produces the best possible consequences and the welfarist premise that the value of a state of affairs is entirely determined by its overall amount of well-being. The other strategy is based on the idea of treating individuals respectfully and resolving conflicts among individuals in whatever way best conforms to that idea. Although both of these strategies can be used to argue for the principle of act utilitarianism, they are significantly different from each other, and these differences cause them to have different strengths and weaknesses. It emerges that which argumentative strategy is chosen by a proponent of act utilitarianism has a large impact on which virtues her view has and which objections it is vulnerable to.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/s0953820819000086
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan & Mary Midgley - 1986 - The Personalist Forum 2 (1):67-71.
Act Utilitarianism.Ben Eggleston - 2014 - In Ben Eggleston & Dale E. Miller (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Utilitarianism. Cambridge University Press. pp. 125-145.
Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality.Peter Railton - 1984 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 13 (2):134-171.
What is Equality? Part 1: Equality of Welfare.Ronald Dworkin - 1981 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 10 (3):185-246.

View all 19 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Heavy Duty: On the Demands of Consequentialism.Björn Eriksson - 1994 - Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.
From Consequentialism to Utilitarianism.Martin Peterson - 2003 - Journal of Philosophy 100 (8):403 - 415.
Value Receptacles.Richard Yetter Chappell - 2015 - Noûs 49 (2):322-332.
Distributive Justice and Welfarism in Utilitarianism.Jörg Schroth - 2008 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 51 (2):123-146.
Rule-Consequentialism's Assumptions.Kevin P. Tobia - 2018 - Utilitas 30 (4):458-471.
Mill's Utilitarianism: Exposition and Evaluation.Golam Azam - 2005 - Philosophy and Progress 37:137.
Act Utilitarianism.Ben Eggleston - 2014 - In Ben Eggleston & Dale E. Miller (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Utilitarianism. Cambridge University Press. pp. 125-145.
Utilitarismus und Wahrhaftigkeit.Bernd Lahno - 2011 - In Christian Müller, Frank Trosky & Marion Weber (eds.), Ökonomik als Theorie menschlichen Verhaltens. Lucius & Lucius. pp. 273-296.
Rule-Consequentialism's Dilemma.Iain Law - 1999 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2 (3):263-276.
On the Incoherence Objection to Rule-Utilitarianism.Alex Rajczi - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (4):857-876.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-04-23

Total views
63 ( #149,752 of 2,343,995 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
31 ( #21,978 of 2,343,995 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes