Grenzen für den Utilitarismus. Ein transzendentales Gegenargument

In Wolfram Hogrebe (ed.), Grenzen und Grenzüberschreitungen. XIX. Deutscher Kongress für Philosophie - Sektionsbeiträge. Sinclair Press. pp. 107-115 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Let us imagine an ideal ethical agent, i.e., an agent who (i) holds a certain ethical theory, (ii) has all factual knowledge needed for determining which action among those open to her is right and which is wrong, according to her theory, and who (iii) is ideally motivated to really do whatever her ethical theory demands her to do (even when she speaks). If we grant that the notions of omniscience and ideal motivation both make sense, we may ask: Could there possibly be an ideal utilitarian, that is, an ideal ethical agent whose ethical theory says that our only moral obligation consists in maximizing utility? I claim that an ideal agent cannot be utilitarian. An ideal utilitarian cannot entertain or communicate the beliefs necessary to being a utilitarian. For if every speech act from her mouth maximizes utility, she cannot be interpreted to utter assertions at all. Her very moral theory undermines the conditions necessary for entertaining it.

Author's Profile

Olaf L. Müller
Humboldt University, Berlin

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-04-25

Downloads
204 (#84,459)

6 months
54 (#90,225)

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?