The Rejection of Consequentializing

Journal of Philosophy 118 (2):79-96 (2021)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Consequentialists say we may always promote the good. Deontologists object: not if that means killing one to save five. “Consequentializers” reply: this act is wrong, but it is not for the best, since killing is worse than letting die. I argue that this reply undercuts the “compellingness” of consequentialism, which comes from an outcome-based view of action that collapses the distinction between killing and letting die.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
MUOTRO-2
Upload history
First archival date: 2020-05-03
Latest version: 6 (2020-07-03)
View other versions
Added to PP index
2020-05-03

Total views
989 ( #4,643 of 2,445,942 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
189 ( #2,842 of 2,445,942 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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