A Humean Constructivist Reading of J. S. Mill's Utilitarian Theory

Utilitas 28 (2):189-214 (2016)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
There is a common view that the utilitarian theory of John Stuart Mill is morally realist and involves a strong kind of practical obligation. This article argues for two negative theses and a positive thesis. The negative theses are that Mill is not a moral realist and that he does not believe in certain kinds of obligations, those involving external reasons and those I call robust obligations, obligations with a particular, strong kind of practical authority. The positive thesis is that Mill’s metaethical position can be interpreted as a Humean constructivist view, a metaethical view that is constructivist about value and entails the existence of practical reasons, but not external reasons or robust obligations. I argue that a Humean constructivist reading of Mill’s theory is reasonable, and strengthens Mill’s argument from desire for the value of happiness, an important but notoriously weak aspect of his theory.
Reprint years
2016
PhilPapers/Archive ID
DRAAHC
Revision history
First archival date: 2019-06-28
Latest version: 2 (2019-06-28)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
The Moral Problem.Smith, Michael

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2015-08-08

Total views
61 ( #31,023 of 41,573 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
19 ( #26,757 of 41,573 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.