5 found
Order:
See also
Mark Budolfson
University of Texas at Austin
  1. The inefficacy objection to consequentialism and the problem with the expected consequences response.Mark Bryant Budolfson - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (7):1711-1724.
    Collective action problems lie behind many core issues in ethics and social philosophy—for example, whether an individual is required to vote, whether it is wrong to consume products that are produced in morally objectionable ways, and many others. In these cases, it matters greatly what we together do, but yet a single individual’s ‘non-cooperative’ choice seems to make no difference to the outcome and also seems to involve no violation of anyone’s rights. Here it is argued that—contrary to influential arguments (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   38 citations  
  2. Is It Wrong to Eat Meat from Factory Farms? If So, Why?Mark Bryant Budolfson - 2015 - In The Moral Complexities of Eating Meat. pp. 1-22.
    Many philosophers endorse utilitarian arguments against eating meat along the lines of Peter Singer’s, while others endorse deontological arguments along the lines of Tom Regan’s. This chapter suggests that both types of arguments are too quick. Empirical reasons are outlined for thinking that when one eats meat, that doesn’t make a difference to animals in the way that it would have to for either type of argument to be sound—and this chapter argues that this is true notwithstanding recent “expected utility” (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  3. Non-cognitivism and rational inference.Mark Bryant Budolfson - 2011 - Philosophical Studies 153 (2):243 - 259.
    Non-cognitivism might seem to offer a plausible account of evaluative judgments, at least on the assumption that there is a satisfactory solution to the Frege-Geach problem. However, Cian Dorr has argued that non-cognitivism remains implausible even assuming that the Frege-Geach problem can be solved, on the grounds that non-cognitivism still has to classify some paradigmatically rational inferences as irrational. Dorr's argument is ingenious and at first glance seems decisive. However, in this paper I will show that Dorr's argument equivocates between (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  4.  84
    Self-Defense, Harm to Others, and Reasons for Action in Collective Action Problems.Mark Bryant Budolfson - 2014 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 17 (1):31-34.
    Baatz’s excellent discussion moves the debate forward in two ways that I will focus on here: first, by articulating an attractive view based on the notion of what can reasonably be demanded of individuals, and second, by providing a helpful overview of much of the existing literature. In what follows I suggest three ways Baatz and others might further clarify and build on these contributions in future research.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  5.  71
    Why the Standard Interpretation of Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethic is Mistaken.Mark Bryant Budolfson - 2014 - Environmental Ethics 36 (4):443-453.
    The standard interpretation of Aldo Leopold’s land ethic is that correct land management is whatever tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community, of which we humans are merely a small part. From this interpretation, it is a short step to interpreting Leopold as a sort of deep ecologist or radical environmentalist. However, this interpretation is based on a small number of quotations from Leopold taken out of context. Once these quota­tions are put into context, and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark