Act utilitarianism and the moral fanaticism argument

Philosophical Studies 46 (2):215 - 226 (1984)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

One apparently devastating criticism of a whole range of act utilitarian (au) principles is marcus singer's claim that such principles are open to the charge of moral fanaticism, I.E., They commit one to the view that "no action is indifferent or trivial, Every occasion is momentous." this moral fanaticism argument (mfa) is examined in detail. I argue that the mfa is not all that devastating; indeed the act utilitarian can altogether escape the charge of being a fanatic

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,590

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

Moral Fanaticism and the Holocaust.Lee F. Kerckhove - 1994 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 1 (1):21-25.
Utilitarian alternatives to act utilitarianism.Sanford S. Levy - 1997 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (1):93–112.
Moral education: An act-utilitarian view1.Sanford S. Levy - 1990 - Studies in Philosophy and Education 10 (2):165-174.
What’s so bad about fanaticism?Paul Katsafanas - 2024 - Synthese 203 (6):1-18.
The trouble with categorial consistency.Robert Simon - 1975 - Philosophical Studies 27 (4):271 - 277.
Can Determinists Act Under the Idea of Freedom?Martin F. Fricke - 2023 - Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy 42 (2):49-64.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
53 (#99,339)

6 months
6 (#1,472,471)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mark Timmons
University of Arizona

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations