The Failure of Hooker’s Argument for Rule Consequentialism

Brad Hooker argues for rule consequentialism using narrow reflective equilibrium resources along with a handful of wider resources. One of his important claims in defense of rule consequentialism is that it begins from a familiar and attractive idea about morality. I argue that his defense of rule c...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Levy, Sanford (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Gargar...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publicado: Brill 2014
En: Journal of moral philosophy
Año: 2014, Volumen: 11, Número: 5, Páginas: 598-614
Otras palabras clave:B Rule Utilitarianism
B Utilitarianism
B Moral Theory
B Hooker
B rule consequentialism
B Consequentialism
Acceso en línea: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Descripción
Sumario:Brad Hooker argues for rule consequentialism using narrow reflective equilibrium resources along with a handful of wider resources. One of his important claims in defense of rule consequentialism is that it begins from a familiar and attractive idea about morality. I argue that his defense of rule consequentialism fails and more particularly, that rather than beginning from a familiar and attractive idea, it begins from an idea that is quite unattractive. I show this by applying the method rule consequentialists use to derive moral advice for the real world to non-moral cases where its unattractiveness is clear. I then argue that the basic idea behind rule consequentialism is attractive if considered as an account of moral reform, in so far as the account of moral reform can be divorced from one’s account of right and wrong, something that occurs in theories like that of Stephen Toulmin.
ISSN:1745-5243
Obras secundarias:Enthalten in: Journal of moral philosophy
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/17455243-4681014