Act Utilitarianism and Decision Procedures: Robert L. Frazier

Utilitas 6 (1):43-53 (1994)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A standard objection to act utilitarian theories is that they are not helpful in deciding what it is morally permissible for us to do when we actually have to make a choice between alternatives. That is, such theories are worthless as decision procedures. A standard reply to this objection is that act utilitarian theories can be evaluated solely as theories about right-making characteristics and, when so evaluated, their inadequacy as decision procedures is irrelevant. Even if somewhat unappealing, this is an effective reply to the standard objection.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,628

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A dilemma for objective act-utilitarianism.Gerald Lang - 2004 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (2):221-239.
Utilitarian morality and the personal point of view.David O. Brink - 1986 - Journal of Philosophy 83 (8):417-438.
Collective informed consent and decision power.Jukka Varelius - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):39-50.
The Limits of Maximization.Eric Wiland - 2010 - Polish Journal of Philosophy 4 (1):99-116.
Apodeictic syllogisms: Deductions and decision procedures.Fred Johnson - 1995 - History and Philosophy of Logic 16 (1):1-18.
Consequentialism and commitment.Alastair Norcross - 1997 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):380–403.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-11-09

Downloads
168 (#114,388)

6 months
26 (#112,011)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Alienation, consequentialism, and the demands of morality.Peter Railton - 1984 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 13 (2):134-171.
Principia Ethica.Evander Bradley McGilvary - 1904 - Philosophical Review 13 (3):351.
Events and their Names.Carol E. Cleland - 1994 - Noûs 28 (1):103-109.

View all 7 references / Add more references