Journal of Value Inquiry 46 (4):467-479 (2012)

Simon Wigley
Bilkent University
A standard criticism of act-utilitarianism is that it is only indirectly concerned with the distribution of welfare between individuals and, therefore, does not take adequate account of the separateness between individuals. In response a number of philosophers have argued that act-utilitarianism is only vulnerable to that objection because it adheres to a theory of the good which ignores non-welfarist sources of intrinsic value such as justice. Fred Feldman, for example, argues that intrinsic value is independently generated by the receipt of welfare and the degree to which receipt accords with the demands of justice, and that an action is right insofar as it maximizes the sum of both those sources of value. In response it is argued that justicized consequentialism only blocks the objection at the expense of presupposing deontological constraints. In addition, it is argued that the value of justice cannot be explained non-deontically and, therefore, that the proposed theory is not consequentialist all the way down
Keywords act-utilitarianism  objection from justice  intrinsic value  deontological constraints
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10790-013-9361-5
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,735
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Rule-Consequentialism's Assumptions.Kevin P. Tobia - 2018 - Utilitas 30 (4):458-471.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Distributive Justice and Welfarism in Utilitarianism.Jörg Schroth - 2008 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 51 (2):123-146.
Desert as Fit: An Axiomatic Analysis.Gustaf Arrhenius - 2006 - In Kris McDaniel, Jason R. Raibley, Richard Feldman & Michael E. Zimmerman (eds.), The Good, the Right, Life And Death: Essays in Honor of Fred Feldman. Aldershot: Ashgate Pub Co. pp. 3-17.
The Impotence of the Demandingness Objection.David Sobel - 2007 - Philosophers' Imprint 7:1-17.
The Origins of the Objection.Steven Sverdlik - 2012 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 29 (1):79-101.
Readjusting Utility for Justice.Dennis R. Cooley - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Research 25:363-380.
Can an Act-Consequentialist Theory Be Agent Relative?Douglas W. Portmore - 2001 - American Philosophical Quarterly 38 (4):363-77.


Added to PP index

Total views
93 ( #111,266 of 2,432,433 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #138,307 of 2,432,433 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes