Comments on the commentaries

Utilitas 16 (2):184-192 (2004)
Abstract
Adams 's suggestion that there must be one really right way of presenting the history of moral philosophy seems implausible to me, so I reject – with additional reasons – his charges against the structure of Invention of Autonomy. Skorupski's way of stating the ‘equal moral abilities’ thesis is not, I argue, very Kantian; a more Kantian version is not open to his objections. I am unconvinced by Schultz's claim that Sidgwick did not really hold that thesis. Deigh raises questions I cannot reply to here, but I do offer some texts that seem to show that Sidgwick is not guilty of the confusion about ‘ought’ with which Deigh charges him. Correspondence:c1 jbs1@jhu.edu
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0953820804000524
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 26,162
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Virtue Ethics and Elitism.Frans Svensson - 2008 - Philosophical Papers 37 (1):131-155.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

49 ( #103,699 of 2,152,527 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

26 ( #12,935 of 2,152,527 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums