« Generalizing Moorean Facts | Main | More on Pott's Book »

Comments

Tony Marmo

OFFTOPIC:

I think it would be interesting if you could post an introduction to consequentialism step by step here in your blog.

It also should be the case that Ethics, from a truely Philosophical point of view, has to be come one discipline at High School level too, given its growing importance in the present world scenario.

Scott Wilson

One thing that I find interesting in this post is that you assume that virtue theory, conseuqentialism, and deontology are all rival theories, in the sense that if you support one you cannot support the others. I used to think the same thing until I read Kagan's remarkable article, "The Structure of Normative Ethics". He argues that it may be that each of these three theories is attempting to answer different questions; it may turn out that each can fit into a more comprehensive normative theory that answers many different questions. This idea is spelled out in detail in his book, "Normative Ethics".

The article and book have changed the way I think about ethics. I am now attracted to what I call Consequentialist Based Virtue Theory--it has some affinities to Railton's Sophisticated Consequentialism, but is more akin to Crisp's article "Utilitarianism and the Life of Vrtue", Bradley's "Virtue Consequentialism", and the recent work of Julia Driver, esp. "Uneasy Virtue".

The comments to this entry are closed.

August 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Blog powered by Typepad