Morality, Uncertainty

Philosophical Quarterly (forthcoming)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Non-Consequentialist moral theories posit the existence of moral constraints: prohibitions on performing particular kinds of wrongful acts, regardless of the good those acts could produce. Many believe that such theories cannot give satisfactory verdicts about what we morally ought to do when there is some probability that we will violate a moral constraint. In this article, I defend Non-Consequentialist theories from this critique. Using a general choice-theoretic framework, I identify various types of Non-Consequentialism that have otherwise been conflated in the debate. I then prove a number of formal possibility and impossibility results establishing which types of Non-Consequentialism can -- and which cannot -- give us adequate guidance through through a risky world.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LEEMU
Upload history
Archival date: 2020-04-28
View other versions
Added to PP index
2020-01-18

Total views
68 ( #39,358 of 51,738 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
66 ( #7,778 of 51,738 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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