Consequentialism and the subversion of pluralism

Alan Thomas
Tilburg University
This paper critically analyses Brad Hooker's attempt to undercut pluralism by arguing that any plausible set of prima facie duties can be derived from a more fundamental rule consequentialist principle. It is argued that this conclusion is foreshadowed by the rationalist and epistemologically realist interpretation that Hooker imposes on his chosen methodology of reflective equilibrium; he is not describing pluralism in its strongest and most plausible version and a more plausible version of pluralism is described and defended.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
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: 34,507
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Rule-Consequentialism's Dilemma.Iain Law - 1999 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2 (3):263-276.
Recalcitrant Pluralism.Philip Stratton-Lake - 2011 - Ratio 24 (4):364-383.
Eliminative Pluralism.Marc Ereshefsky - 1992 - Philosophy of Science 59 (4):671-690.
Could God Have More Than One Nature?Robert McKim - 1988 - Faith and Philosophy 5 (4):378-398.


Added to PP index

Total downloads
30 ( #203,123 of 2,268,121 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #373,366 of 2,268,121 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature