A Particular Consequentialism:
نویسندگان
چکیده
Moral particularism is commonly presented as an alternative to ‘principleor rule-based’ approaches to ethics, such as consequentialism or Kantianism. This paper argues that particularists’ aversions to consequentialism stem not from a structural feature of consequentialism per se, but from substantial and structural axiological views traditionally associated with consequentialism. Given a particular approach to (intrinsic) value, there need be no conflict between moral particularism and consequentialism. We consider and reject a number of challenges holding that there is after all such a conflict. We end by suggesting that our proposed position appears quite appealing since it preserves attractive elements from particularism as well as consequentialism.
منابع مشابه
A Defence of Epistemic Consequentialism
Epistemic consequentialists maintain that the epistemically right (e.g. the justified) is to be understood in terms of conduciveness to the epistemic good (e.g. true belief). Given the wide variety of epistemological approaches that assume some form of epistemic consequentialism, and the controversies surrounding consequentialism in ethics, it is surprising that epistemic consequentialism remai...
متن کاملHow to be a consequentialist about everything
Over the last few decades, there has been an increasing interest in global consequentialism. Where act-consequentialism assesses acts in terms of their consequences, global consequentialism goes much further, assessing acts, rules, motives — and everything else — in terms of the relevant consequences. Compared to act-consequentialism it offers a number of advantages: it is more expressive, it i...
متن کاملConsequentialism, Group Acts, and Trolleys
Consequentialism, Group Acts, and Trolleys Joseph Mendola Abstract: Multiple-Act Consequentialism specifies that one should only defect from a group act with good consequences if one can achieve better consequences by the defecting act alone than the entire group act achieves. It also holds that when different valuable group agents of which one is part specify roles which conflict, one should f...
متن کاملConsequentialism, Metaphysical Realism, and the Argument from Clueless- ness†
The most powerful version of the classic epistemic argument against consequentialism is stated in an article by James Lenman. Lenman’s “argument from cluelessness” claims that a significant percentage of the consequences of our actions are wholly unknowable and hence, when it comes to assessing the moral quality of our actions, we are literally without a clue. In this paper, I distinguish the a...
متن کاملConsequentialism and Actual Rules 0. Introduction
After considering some problems facing exiting versions of consequentialism, I present the schematic outline of an alternative version of consequentialism, which I call Actual Rule Consequentialism (ARC). I then consider three ways in which one might attempt to ground ARC by deriving it from some more fundamental principle. The first attempt is to derive ARC from a principle of fairness, the se...
متن کامل