Australasian Journal of Philosophy 47 (2):174-183 (1969)
Hare used his thesis of universalizability to generate specific normative results and a defense of utilitarianism. To accomplish the latter task, he enjoined that one consider oneself in various roles in a given situation, and that the concluding judgment must be one that is affirmable in any of the various roles. In effect this means that one must, says Hare, give equal weight to the interests of all involved parties, an axiom of utilitarianism. The paper argues that he did not succeed.
|Keywords||universalizability utilitarianism proofs arguments|
|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
Universalizability and the Summing of Desires: Reply to Ingmar Persson.R. M. Hare - 1989 - Theoria 55 (3):171-177.
Hare, Singer and Gewirth on Universalizability.W. Gregory Lycan - 1969 - Philosophical Quarterly 19 (75):135-144.
Skepticism and Varieties of Epistemic Universalizability.Hamid Vahid - 2001 - Journal of Philosophical Research 26:325-341.
What If I Were in His Shoes? On Hare's Argument for Preference Utilitarianism.Wlodek Rabinowicz & Bertil Strömberg - 1996 - Theoria 62 (1-2):95-123.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #265,864 of 2,153,578 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #162,587 of 2,153,578 )
How can I increase my downloads?