Variable versus fixed-rate rule-utilitarianism
Philosophical Quarterly 58 (231):344–352 (2008)
Abstract
Fixed-rate versions of rule-consequentialism and rule-utilitarianism evaluate rules in terms of the expected net value of one particular level of social acceptance, but one far enough below 100% social acceptance to make salient the complexities created by partial compliance. Variable-rate versions of rule-consequentialism and rule-utilitarianism instead evaluate rules in terms of their expected net value at all different levels of social acceptance. Brad Hooker has advocated a fixed-rate version. Michael Ridge has argued that the variable-rate version is better. The debate continues here. Of particular interest is the difference between the implications of Hooker's and Ridge's rules about doing good for others.Author Profiles
DOI
10.1111/j.1467-9213.2007.518.x
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
539 (#15,946)
6 months
66 (#17,221)
2009-01-28
Downloads
539 (#15,946)
6 months
66 (#17,221)
Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?