Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Moral Murderer. A (More) Effective Counterexample to Consequentialism.Eduardo Rivera-López - 2012 - Ratio 25 (3):307-325.
    My aim in this paper is to provide an effective counterexample to consequentialism. I assume that traditional counterexamples, such as Transplant (A doctor should kill one person and transplant her organs to five terminal patients, thereby saving their lives) and Judge (A judge should sentence to death an innocent person if he knows that an outraged mob will otherwise kill many innocent persons), are not effective, for two reasons: first, they make unrealistic assumptions and, second, they do not pass the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Buddhist Non-Cognitivism.Joseph D. Markowski - 2014 - Asian Philosophy 24 (3):227-241.
    The purpose of this essay is twofold. First, I plan to argue that in light of Buddhist epistemology and metaphysics, it would be an inherent contradiction to the Buddhist tradition as whole to defend the cognitivist view that moral knowledge is possible. Quite the contrary, this essay will demonstrate that, in light of Buddhist theories of knowledge and metaphysical philosophies of no-self and emptiness, Buddhist ethics only makes coherent sense from a standpoint of non-cognitivism. Second, from the arguments that support (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Murdoch on the Sovereignty of Good.Kieran Setiya - 2013 - Philosophers' Imprint 13.
    Argues for an interpretation of Iris Murdoch on which her account of moral reasons has Platonic roots, and on which she gives an ontological proof of the reality of the Good. This reading explains the structure of Sovereignty, how Murdoch's claims differ from a focus on "thick moral concepts," and how to find coherent arguments in her book.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • How can we be moral when we are so irrational?Nils-Eric Sahlin & Johan Brännmark - unknown
    Normative ethics usually presupposes background accounts of human agency, and although different ethical theorists might have different pictures of human agency in mind, there is still something like a standard account that most of mainstream normative ethics can be understood to rest on. Ethical theorists tend to have Rational Man, or at least some close relative to him, in mind when constructing normative theories. It will be argued here that empirical findings raise doubts about the accuracy of this kind of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations