Can an indirect consequentialist be a real friend?

Ethics 108 (2):386-393 (1998)
Elinor Mason
University of Edinburgh
Cocking and Oakley, ("Indirect Consequentialism, Friendship, and the Problem of Alienation", Ethics 106 (October 1995)) claim that a consequentialist's particular relationships will always be contingent on their maximizing the good, and thus will always be alienated. However, an indirect consequentialist will take into account the fact that her relationships would be alienated were she disposed to terminate them whenever they become suboptimal. If real friendships are worth having, a consequentialist should have them. Thus, she should have a pro-friendship disposition. Railton's counterfactual condition should be interpreted as a claim that consequentialists should be disposed to alter that disposition if it turns out that it is not optimal.
Keywords Consequentialism  Friendship  Dean Cocking  Justin Oakley  Consequentialism  Alienation  Railton  Counterfactual condition
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/233810
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 36,596
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Duties to Make Friends.Stephanie Collins - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (5):907-921.
Consequentialism, Teleology, and the New Friendship Critique.Robert F. Card - 2004 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 85 (2):149-172.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total downloads
82 ( #80,909 of 2,303,814 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #428,521 of 2,303,814 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature