Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 79 (1):19–33 (1998)
Most of us believe morality requires us to help the desperately needy. But most of us also believe morality doesn't require us to make enormous sacrifices in order to help people who have no special connection with us. Such self-sacrifice is of course praiseworthy, but it isn't morally mandatory. Rule-consequentialism might seem to offer a plausible grounding for such beliefs. Tim Mulgan has recently argued in _Analysis
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Indicator Reliabilism.James Chase - 2004 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 69 (1):115 - 137.
Rule Consequentialism and Scope.Leonard Kahn - 2012 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (5):631-646.
Similar books and articles
Ross-Style Pluralism Versus Rule-Consequentialism.Brad Hooker - 1996 - Mind 105 (420):531-552.
Ideal Code, Real World: A Rule-Consequentialist Theory of Morality.Brad Hooker - 2000 - Oxford University Press.
Sophisticated Rule Consequentialism: Some Simple Objections.Richard Arneson - 2005 - Philosophical Issues 15 (1):235–251.
Variable Versus Fixed-Rate Rule-Utilitarianism.Brad Hooker & Guy Fletcher - 2008 - Philosophical Quarterly 58 (231):344–352.
The Rights and Wrongs of Consequentialism.Brian McElwee - 2010 - Philosophical Studies 151 (3):393 - 412.
Rule-Consequentialism and Demandingness: A Reply to Carson.Brad Hooker - 1991 - Mind 100 (2):269-276.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #119,547 of 2,177,980 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #317,206 of 2,177,980 )
How can I increase my downloads?