'Mill, Moore, and Intrinsic Value'

Social Theory and Practice 34 (4):517-32 (2008)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
In this paper, I examine how philosophers before and after G. E. Moore understood intrinsic value. The main idea I wish to bring out and defend is that Moore was insufficiently attentive to how distinctive his conception of intrinsic value was, as compared with those of the writers he discussed, and that such inattentiveness skewed his understanding of the positions of others that he discussed and dismissed. My way into this issue is by examining the charge of inconsistency that Moore levels at the qualitative hedonism outlined by J. S. Mill in Utilitarianism. Along the way I suggest that there are a number of ways in which Moore was unfair in rejecting qualitative hedonism as inconsistent. I close by relating the issues that arise in discussion of Moore to contemporary debates on value and reasons.
ISBN(s)
0037-802X  
PhilPapers/Archive ID
FLEMMA
Revision history
First archival date: 2010-11-05
Latest version: 5 (2016-02-24)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2009-07-21

Total views
844 ( #2,253 of 39,686 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
58 ( #7,896 of 39,686 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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