If there are moral experts, this would seem to have important implications for a number of issues in philosophical ethics. So who is a moral […] Read More
Category: Discussions
If (like me) you think that it’s more important to making the world a better place that people pay attention to the right things (rather […] Read More
Following our earlier discussion about the merits of particularism comes this review by Timonthy Chappell of Jonathan Dancy’s new book, Ethics Without Principles. Book reviewing, […] Read More
Satisficing consequentialism (SC) is the view that an act is morally right iff its consequences are “good enough.” Michael Slote came up with a few […] Read More
Actualist Utilitarianism (AU) is, roughly stated, the view that we ought to act so as to maximise the sum total of actual people’s utilities. (By […] Read More
Lest anyone think that Campbell Brown went on a murderous rampage against all other PEA Brains to take over the blog for himself, I feel […] Read More
Within consequentialism, it’s common to draw a distinction between two kinds of rightness: an act X is said to be objectively right just when, among […] Read More
In an earlier post, Supererogation for Maximisers, I tried to reconcile two apparently irreconcilable claims: first, that maximising consequentialism is true; and, second, that supererogatory […] Read More
Here’s an ethical issue (actually, a pair of them) which I’m sure all of us have faced, or will. Sometimes students come to instructors seeking […] Read More