File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1017/S0953820818000146
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85056177229
- WOS: WOS:000465276500001
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Consequentialism and Moral Worth
Title | Consequentialism and Moral Worth |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 2019 |
Citation | Utilitas, 2019, v. 31, n. 2, p. 117-136 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Sometimes, agents do the right thing for the right reason. What's the normative significance of this phenomenon? According to proponents of the special status view, when an agent acts for the right reason, her actions enjoy a special normative status, namely, worthiness. Proponents of this view claim that self-effacing forms of consequentialism cannot say this plausible thing, and, worse, are blocked from having a perspicuous view of matters by the self-effacing nature of their consequentialism. In this article, I argue that this claim is based on an illicit assumption. I show that whatever version of the special status view proponents of that view prefer, self-effacing consequentialists can adopt a version of it. Moreover, I show that proponents of extant versions of the special status view have reason to prefer the specific version of that view I articulate on behalf of self-effacing consequentialists. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/303590 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 1.2 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.381 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Sharadin, Nathaniel | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-09-15T08:25:37Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2021-09-15T08:25:37Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Utilitas, 2019, v. 31, n. 2, p. 117-136 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0953-8208 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/303590 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Sometimes, agents do the right thing for the right reason. What's the normative significance of this phenomenon? According to proponents of the special status view, when an agent acts for the right reason, her actions enjoy a special normative status, namely, worthiness. Proponents of this view claim that self-effacing forms of consequentialism cannot say this plausible thing, and, worse, are blocked from having a perspicuous view of matters by the self-effacing nature of their consequentialism. In this article, I argue that this claim is based on an illicit assumption. I show that whatever version of the special status view proponents of that view prefer, self-effacing consequentialists can adopt a version of it. Moreover, I show that proponents of extant versions of the special status view have reason to prefer the specific version of that view I articulate on behalf of self-effacing consequentialists. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Utilitas | - |
dc.title | Consequentialism and Moral Worth | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1017/S0953820818000146 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85056177229 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 31 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 2 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 117 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 136 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1741-6183 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000465276500001 | - |