Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 5 (2):108-118 (2016)

Authors
Johan E. Gustafsson
University of York
Abstract
Moral wrongness comes in degrees. On a consequentialist view of ethics, the wrongness of an act should depend, I argue, in part on how much worse the act's consequences are compared with those of its alternatives and in part on how difficult it is to perform the alternatives with better consequences. I extend act consequentialism to take this into account, and I defend three conditions on consequentialist theories. The first is consequentialist dominance, which says that, if an act has better consequences than some alternative act, then it is not more wrong than the alternative act. The second is consequentialist supervenience, which says that, if two acts have equally good consequences in a situation, then they have the same deontic status in the situation. And the third is consequentialist continuity, which says that, for every act and for any difference in wrongness δ greater than zero, there is an arbitrarily small improvement of the consequences of the act which would, other things being equal, not change the wrongness of that act or any alternative by more than δ. I defend a proposal that satisfies these conditions.
Keywords consequentialist supervenience  degrees of wrongness  consequentialism  consequentialist dominance  consequentialist continuity  easiness  difficulty
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1002/tht3.200
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,593
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Oxford University Press.
Reasons and Persons.Joseph Margolis - 1986 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 47 (2):311-327.
Utilitarianism and Co-Operation.Donald H. Regan - 1980 - Oxford University Press.

View all 18 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Degrees of Assertability.Sam Carter - forthcoming - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

A Consequentialist Case for Rejecting the Right.Frances Howard-Snyder & Alastair Norcross - 1993 - Journal of Philosophical Research 18:109-125.
Consequentialism and Commitment.Alastair Norcross - 1997 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):380–403.
Consequentialize This.Campbell Brown - 2011 - Ethics 121 (4):749-771.
Consequentialist Options.Jussi Suikkanen - 2014 - Utilitas 26 (3):276-302.
Agent Neutrality is the Exclusive Feature of Consequentialism.Desheng Zong - 2000 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 38 (4):676-693.
Consequentializing Moral Theories.Douglas W. Portmore - 2007 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 88 (1):39–73.
A Dilemma for Rule-Consequentialism.Jussi Suikkanen - 2008 - Philosophia 36 (1):141-150.
Meaning in Consequences.Mark Wells - 2015 - Journal of Philosophy of Life 5 (3):169-179.
Ethics of Social Consequences as a Contemporary Consequentialist Theory.Ján Kalajtzidis - 2013 - Ethics and Bioethics (in Central Europe) 3 (3-4):159-171.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-05-02

Total views
114 ( #97,127 of 2,462,098 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #119,269 of 2,462,098 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes