• English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • English 
    • English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Philosophy collections
  • Philosophical Ethics
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Philosophy collections
  • Philosophical Ethics
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Browse

All of the LibraryCommunitiesPublication DateTitlesSubjectsAuthorsThis CollectionPublication DateTitlesSubjectsAuthorsProfilesView

My Account

LoginRegister

The Library

AboutNew SubmissionSubmission GuideSearch GuideRepository PolicyContact

Against Maximizing Act-Consequentialism

  • CSV
  • RefMan
  • EndNote
  • BibTex
  • RefWorks
Author(s)
Vallentyne, Peter
Contributor(s)
University of Missouri-Columbia. College of Arts and Sciences. Department of Philosophy
Keywords
social and political philosophy
Act (Philosophy)
act consequentialism
Decision making -- Moral and ethical aspects
morality
Supervenience (Philosophy)
Utilitarianism
Consequentialism (Ethics)

Full record
Show full item record
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/641764
Online Access
http://hdl.handle.net/10355/10174
Abstract
http://klinechair.missouri.edu/on-line%20papers/consequentialism%20for%20Blackwell.doc
Maximizing act consequentialism holds that actions are morally permissible if and only if they maximize the value of consequences—if and only if, that is, no alternative action in the given choice situation has more valuable consequences. It is subject to two main objections. One is that it fails to recognize that morality imposes certain constraints on how we may promote value. Maximizing act consequentialism fails to recognize, I shall argue, that the ends do not always justify the means. Actions with maximally valuable consequences are not always permissible. The second main objection to maximizing act consequentialism is that it mistakenly holds that morality requires us to maximize value. Morality, I shall argue, only requires that we satisfice (promote sufficiently) value, and thus leaves us a greater range of options than maximizing act consequentialism recognizes. The issues discussed are, of course, highly complex, and space limitations prevent me from addressing them fully. Thus, the argument presented should be understood merely as the outline of an argument.
Date
2006-02
Type
Book chapter
Identifier
oai:mospace.umsystem.edu:10355/10174
9781405101783
http://hdl.handle.net/10355/10174
Contemporary debates in moral theory. ed. James Dreier. Malden: Blackwell, 2006. pp. 21-37.
Collections
Philosophical Ethics

entitlement

 
DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2021)  DuraSpace
Quick Guide | Contact Us
Open Repository is a service operated by 
Atmire NV
 

Export search results

The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.