In R. Sandler & P. Cafaro (eds.), Environmental Virtue Ethics. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 107--17 (2005)
Both utilitarian and deontological moral theories locate the source of our moral beliefs in the wrong sorts of considerations. One way this failure manifests itself, we argue, is in the ways these theories analyze the proper human relationship toward the non-human environment. Another, more notorious, manifestation of this failure is found in Derek Parfit's Repugnant Conclusion. Our goal is to explore the connection between these two failures, and to suggest that they are failures of act-centered moral theories in general. As such, they cannot be fixed by simply developing a better version of such a theory. Virtue-based theories, we suggest, provide a more promising alternative.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Kant's Conception of Virtue.Lara Denis - 2006 - In Paul Guyer (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
Repugnance or Intransitivity: A Repugnant But Forced Choice.Stuart Rachels - 2004 - In Jesper Ryberg Torbjorn Tannsjo (ed.), The Repugnant Conclusion: Essays on Population Ethics. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Is Virtue Ethics Self-Effacing?Joel Martinez - 2011 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (2):277-288.
Virtue Ethics is Self-Effacing.Simon Keller - 2007 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (2):221 – 231.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads53 ( #94,450 of 2,146,953 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #226,050 of 2,146,953 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.