Sieges, Shipwrecks, andSensible Knaves: Justice and Utility in Butler and Hume

By examining the theories of justice developed by Joseph Butler and David Hume, the author discloses the conceptual limits of their moral naturalism. Butler was unable to accommodate the possibility that justice is, at least to some extent, a social convention. Hume, who more presciently tried to sp...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Bowlin, John R. 1959- (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Wiley-Blackwell 2000
In: Journal of religious ethics
Year: 2000, Volume: 28, Issue: 2, Pages: 253-280
Further subjects:B Justice
B Utility
B Convention
B Aquinas
B Hume
B Butler
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1822384133
003 DE-627
005 20221115213353.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 221115s2000 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1111/0384-9694.00046  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1822384133 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1822384133 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 0  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)1037314212  |0 (DE-627)755434560  |0 (DE-576)39130884X  |4 aut  |a Bowlin, John R.  |d 1959- 
109 |a Bowlin, John R. 1959-  |a Bowlin, John 1959- 
245 1 0 |a Sieges, Shipwrecks, andSensible Knaves: Justice and Utility in Butler and Hume 
264 1 |c 2000 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a By examining the theories of justice developed by Joseph Butler and David Hume, the author discloses the conceptual limits of their moral naturalism. Butler was unable to accommodate the possibility that justice is, at least to some extent, a social convention. Hume, who more presciently tried to spell out the conventional character of justice, was unable to carry through that project within the framework of his moral naturalism. These limits have gone unnoticed,largely because Butler and Hume have been misinterpreted, their relation misconstrued. Exegetes have persistently misunderstood the differences that divide them, have misconceived the notion of “public utility” in Hume's account of justice, have wrongly interpreted Butler as a forerunner of Immanuel Kant, and have altogether missed the degree to which Hume stands in the tradition of Thomas Aquinas. 
650 4 |a Utility 
650 4 |a Justice 
650 4 |a Hume 
650 4 |a Convention 
650 4 |a Butler 
650 4 |a Aquinas 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of religious ethics  |d Oxford : Wiley-Blackwell, 1973  |g 28(2000), 2, Seite 253-280  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)320450171  |w (DE-600)2005952-8  |w (DE-576)090888812  |x 1467-9795  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:28  |g year:2000  |g number:2  |g pages:253-280 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/40024624  |x JSTOR 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1111/0384-9694.00046  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/0384-9694.00046  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4211027514 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1822384133 
LOK |0 005 20221115052623 
LOK |0 008 221115||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-11-03#DF06755293008F8DEDD3BE3D1CD660B528ECECD8 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/40024624 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
SUB |a REL