Act and value: Expectation and the representability of moral theories

Theoria 57 (1-2):42-76 (1991)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to the axiologist the value concepts are basic and the deontic concepts are derivative. This paper addresses two fundamental problems that arise for the axiologist. Firstly, what ought the axiologist o understand by the value of an act? Second, what are the prospects in principle for an axiological representation of moral theories. Can the deontic concepts of any coherent moral theory be represented by an agent-netural axiology: (1) whatever structure those concepts have and (2) whatever the causal structure of the world happens to be. We show that the answer is "almost always". The only substantive constraint is that autonomous moral agents cannot have the power to simultaneously block the options open to other autonomous moral agents. But this seems to be part and parcel of the notion of an autonomous moral agent.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-13

Downloads
217 (#89,543)

6 months
9 (#290,637)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Graham Oddie
University of Colorado, Boulder
Peter Milne
University of Stirling

Citations of this work

The fundamental reason for reasons fundamentalism.Mark Schroeder - 2021 - Philosophical Studies 178 (10):3107-3127.
Value theory.Mark Schroeder - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Consequentializing.Douglas W. Portmore - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (2):329-347.

View all 29 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references