Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / Utilitarianism / Journal articles

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Utilitarianism.

Journal articles on the topic 'Utilitarianism'

Author: Grafiati

Published: 4 June 2021

Last updated: 31 July 2024

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Utilitarianism.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

LANG, GERALD. "Should Utilitarianism Be Scalar?" Utilitas 25, no. 1 (March 2013): 80–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820812000295.

Full text

Abstract:

Scalar utilitarianism, a form of utilitarianism advocated by Alastair Norcross, retains utilitarianism's evaluative commitments while dispensing with utilitarianism's deontic commitments, or its commitment to the existence or significance of moral duties, obligations and requirements. This article disputes the effectiveness of the arguments that have been used to defend scalar utilitarianism. It is contended that Norcross's central ‘Persuasion Argument’ does not succeed, and it is suggested, more positively, that utilitarians cannot easily distance themselves from deontic assessment, just as long as scalar utilitarians admit – as they should do – that utilitarian evaluation generates normative reasons for action.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Tobia, Kevin Patrick. "A DEFENSE OF SCALAR UTILITARIANISM." American Philosophical Quarterly 54, no. 3 (July 1, 2017): 283–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/44982144.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Scalar Utilitarianism eschews foundational notions of rightness and wrongness in favor of evaluative comparisons of outcomes. I defend Scalar Utilitarianism from two critiques, the first against an argument for the thesis that Utilitarianism’s commitments are fundamentally evaluative (or Scalar), and the second that Scalar Utilitarianism does not issue demands or sufficiently guide action. These defenses suggest a variety of more plausible Scalar Utilitarian interpretations, and I argue for a version that best represents a moral theory founded on evaluative notions, and offers better answers to demandingness concerns than does the ordinary Scalar Utilitarian response. If Utilitarians seek reasonable development and explanation of their basic commitments, they may wish to reconsider Scalar Utilitarianism.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Smart, J. J. C. "Utilitarianism and Punishment." Israel Law Review 25, no. 3-4 (1991): 360–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021223700010475.

Full text

Abstract:

Utilitarianism is the view that the rightness of an action depends entirely on expected utility, that is on the sum of the utilities of its consequences weighted by their various probabilities. I shall distinguish two forms of utilitarianism: hedonistic utilitarianism and preference utilitarianism. In hedonistic utilitarianism it is just a matter of pleasure and its opposite, unpleasure. Often utilitarians have used ‘pain’ instead of ‘unpleasure’, but this has the disadvantage that ‘pain’ can suggest ‘a pain’, and ‘a pain’ is not the opposite of ‘a pleasure’. If I annoy you I give you the opposite of pleasure but I do not necessarily give you a pain. In preference utilitarianism we take value to be satisfaction of desires or preferences. It is a difficult theory to work out in so far as we have to take ‘preference’ here to be intrinsic preference, and so need a clear distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic preferences.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Sun, Ruanzhengqi. "The Influences of Utilitarianism on Rawls Theory of Justice." Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media 39, no. 1 (January 22, 2024): 71–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/39/20240663.

Full text

Abstract:

Concerning political philosophy during the second half of the 20th century, Rawls theory of justice stands out, particularly in its critique of utilitarianism. The currency of utilitarianism deeply influences the emergence of Rawls veil of ignorance and two principles of justice. Classical utilitarianism provides Rawls with a theoretical framework, informing him with the importance of predominant criteria to govern a society. While the fact remains that the impairment of individual rights, which is inherited in classical utilitarianism for maximizing the collective welfare, has long been denounced by liberals. To address this, Rawls introduces the social contract theory, arguing for the priority of the right over the good. Whereas the prevalent of average utilitarianism brought Rawls to notice with shortcomings among the traditional version of social contract. By applying the veil of ignorance as an approach of justification, Rawls refutes two premises of average utilitarianism, which are the law of insufficient reason and the analogous preferences of social members. This lays a foundation for his two principles of justice, the greatest equal liberty principle and the difference principle. Justice as fairness incorporates the merits of utilitarianism, providing liberalism with a constructive force, concurrently elucidating the defects of utilitarianism. Accordingly, Rawls argument effectively challenges utilitarianism, coupled with failings of utilitarians to deal persuasive counterattacks, as a consequence, bringing a shift of the dominant in political philosophy from utilitarianism towards liberalism.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Antunes, Teresa. "“Push Pin” ou Poesia ? O Problema da Distinção Qualitativa dos Valores no Utilitarismo." Philosophica: International Journal for the History of Philosophy 13, no. 25 (2005): 105–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philosophica200513257.

Full text

Abstract:

The purpose of this paper is to present the classical problem of knowing if utilitarianism can admit a qualitatively distinction of pleasures or interests, introduced by John Stuart Mill, besides the quantitatively distinction supported by Jeremy Bentham. Moreover, it tries to clarify if the quantity theory of values is consistent with utilitarianism and, even so, if its acceptance does not prevent utilitarians from condemning elitism and speciesist prejudice, as many of them actually do. The claim, here, is that utilitarians can probably still hold that condemnation.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Porter, Jean. "Christianity, Divine Law and Consequentialism." Scottish Journal of Theology 48, no. 4 (November 1995): 415–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0036930600036346.

Full text

Abstract:

In 1971 John Rawls remarked that ‘During much of modern moral philosophy the predominant systematic theory has been some form of utilitarianism.’ Although utilitarianism is no longer the dominant school of moral philosophy, it continues to flourish, generating new defenses and reformulations. Yet with the notable exception of Joseph Fletcher, there have been very few Christian ethicistswho have been prepared to declare themselves to be utilitarians or consequentialists.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Caillé, Alain. "Utilitarianism and Anti-Utilitarianism." Thesis Eleven 33, no. 1 (August 1992): 57–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/072551369203300103.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

TÄNNSJÖ, TORBJÖRN. "Egalitarianism and the Putative Paradoxes of Population Ethics." Utilitas 20, no. 2 (June 2008): 187–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820808002987.

Full text

Abstract:

The repugnant conclusion is acceptable from the point of view of total utilitarianism. Total utilitarians do not seem to be bothered with it. They feel that it is in no way repugnant. To me, a hard-nosed total utilitarian, this settles the case. However, if, sometimes, I doubt that total utilitarianism has the final say in ethics, and tend to think that there may be something to some objection to it or another, it is the objection to it brought forward from egalitarian thought that first comes to mind. But if my argument in this article is correct, then it is clear that the repugnant conclusion should be equally acceptable to egalitarians of various different bents as it is to total utilitarians.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

MULGAN, TIM. "Utilitarianism for a Broken World." Utilitas 27, no. 1 (February 3, 2015): 92–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820814000338.

Full text

Abstract:

Drawing on the author's recent bookEthics for a Broken World, this article explores the philosophical implications of the fact that climate change – or something like it – might lead to abroken worldwhere resources are insufficient to meet everyone's basic needs, and where our affluent way of life is no longer an option. It argues that the broken world has an impact, not only on applied ethics, but also on moral theory. It then explores that impact. The article first argues that the broken world creates severe difficulties for both libertarians and contractualists. It then explores the impact of the broken world on utilitarianism – and especially on reflective equilibrium arguments for rule-utilitarianism. The article concludes that, while such arguments may still be viable, the form of rule-utilitarianism that results will be less moderate and less liberal than contemporary rule-utilitarians might hope.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

You, Zhang. "作为公共哲学的功利主义." China Law Journal 2023, no. 1 (November 24, 2023): 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.55574/xyjq6850.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract: Utilitarianism, as a subversive theory that once led to legal and social reforms, has come in for the opponents to construct a number of thought experiments to push the theory to the opposite side of people’s moral intuition and sense of justice, which makes the theory gradually lost its dominant position in the theory of political philosophy and legislative practice. Although utilitarians have made a series of self-corrections in the theory on the composition of utility and the object of evaluation, they seem to be unable to retreat from the criticism of the four basic elements of consequentialism, welfarism, impartiality and the equal consideration of interests, and the aggregationism. To deal with such a dilemma, contemporary utilitarian Robert Goodin advocates limiting utilitarianism in its scope of application, arguing that treating utilitarianism as a public philosophy will transform the indignities it suffers in the private sphere into virtues in the public affairs. However, this paper finds that Goodin’s strategy still fails to avoid Rawls’s criticism against aggregationism in utilitarianism and the Dirty Hands Problem’s reproach that utilitarianism raises internal moral tensions in agents in public affairs. To this, the paper responds with reference to Hessani’s average utility maximization and Susan Wolf’s “real-self view”.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Mulgan, Tim. "The future of utilitarianism." Tocqueville Review 32, no. 1 (January 2011): 143–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/ttr.32.1.143.

Full text

Abstract:

My recent work has focused on the demands of utilitarianism, and our obligations to future people. In my current work, I draw on that earlier work, and ask how utilitarians might deal with the ethical challenges of climate change. Climate change has obvious practical implications. It will kill millions of people, wipe out thousands of species, and so on. My question in this paper is much narrower. How might climate change impact on moral theory — and especially on the debate between utilitarians and their non-utilitarian rivals?

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Mulgan, Tim. "How should utilitarians think about the future?" Canadian Journal of Philosophy 47, no. 2-3 (2017): 290–312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00455091.2017.1279517.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractUtilitarians must think collectively about the future because many contemporary moral issues require collective responses to avoid possible future harms. But current rule utilitarianism does not accommodate the distant future. Drawing on my recent books Future People and Ethics for a Broken World, I defend a new utilitarianism whose central ethical question is: What moral code should we teach the next generation? This new theory honours utilitarianism’s past and provides the flexibility to adapt to the full range of credible futures – from futures broken by climate change to the digital, virtual and predictable futures produced by various possible technologies.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Rogerson, Ken. "Utilitarian Aggregation." Southwest Philosophy Review 37, no. 1 (2021): 133–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/swphilreview202137115.

Full text

Abstract:

I want to tackle a central thesis of contemporary Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism holds what has come to be called the Aggregation Thesis. The Aggregation Thesis claims, roughly, that several individual harms (or benefits) can be “added up” to represent a larger harm (or benefit). One controversial aspect of this view is that, seemingly, one large harm to a single individual (or smaller group) could be justified if such a harm spared a significantly smaller harm dealt out to a much larger number of other individuals. I will argue that on Utilitarian’s own grounds, the aggregation thesis is not warranted.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Wibowo, Dwi Edi. "Penerapan Konsep Utilitarianisme Untuk Mewujudkan Perlindungan Konsumen Yang Berkeadilan Kajian Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Nomor: 1/POJK.07/2013 Tentang Perlindungan Konsumen Sektor Jasa Keuangan." Syariah: Jurnal Hukum dan Pemikiran 19, no. 1 (March 23, 2019): 15. http://dx.doi.org/10.18592/sy.v19i1.2296.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstrak Peranan internet dalam teknologi informasi telah digunakan untuk mengembangkan industri keuangan (financial industry) melalui modifikasi dan efisiensi layanan jasa keuangan yaitu dikenal dengan istilah Financial Technology atau Fintech. Fintech jenis pinjam-miminjam uang berbasis teknologi atau peer to peer lending (P2P-lending) merupakan jenis Fintech yang tumbuh pesat di Indonesia, kelebihan pinjam meminjam uang melalui layanan P2P-lending lainnya adalah syarat yang sangat mudah dan proses yang cepat dibandingkan meminjam uang melalui Lembaga Bank. Namun kemudahan transaksi yang ditawarkan oleh layanan P2P- lending justru memperlemah posisi dari konsumen. Permasalahan Bagaimanakah Penerapan Konsep Utilitarianisme Untuk Mewujudkan Perlindungan Konsumen Fintech. (Financial Technology) Yang Berkeadilan, Tujuan untuk mengetahui bagaimanakah penerapan konsep utilitarianisme untuk mewujudkan perlindungan kosnumen fintech ( finansial technology yang berkeadilan . Kata kunci : utilitarianisme, perlindungan konsumen, berkeadilan Abstrak The role of the internet in information technology has been used to develop the financial industry through the modification and efficiency of financial services, known as Financial Technology or Fintech. Fintech borrows money based on technology or peer to peer lending (P2P-lending) is a fast-growing type of Fintech in Indonesia, the advantages of lending and borrowing via other P2P-lending services are very easy conditions and a fast process compared to borrowing money through Bank Institution. But the ease of transactions offered by P2P-lending services actually weakens the position of consumers. Problems How to Implement the Utilitarianism Concept to Realize Fintech Consumer Protection. (Financial Technology) that is just, the aim is to find out how the application of the concept of utilitarianism is to realize the protection of fintech consumers (equitable technology finance. Keywords: utilitarianism, consumer protection, justice

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Davies, Ben. "Utilitarianism and Animal Cruelty: Further Doubts." De Ethica 3, no. 3 (February 2, 2017): 5–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.3384/de-ethica.2001-8819.16335.

Full text

Abstract:

Utilitarianism has an apparent pedigree when it comes to animal welfare. It supports the view that animal welfare matters just as much as human welfare. And many utilitarians support and oppose various practices in line with more mainstream concern over animal welfare, such as that we should not kill animals for food or other uses, and that we ought not to torture animals for fun. This relationship has come under tension from many directions. The aim of this article is to add further considerations in support of that tension. I suggest three ways in which utilitarianism comes significantly apart from mainstream concerns with animal welfare. First, utilitarianism opposes animal cruelty only when it offers an inefficient ratio of pleasure to pain; while this may be true of eating animal products, it is not obviously true of other abuses. Second, utilitarianism faces a familiar problem of the inefficacy of individual decisions; I consider a common response to this worry, and offer further concerns. Finally, the common utilitarian argument against animal cruelty ignores various pleasures that humans may get from the superior status that a structure supporting exploitation confers.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Prokofyev, Andrey. "Utilitarianism." Philosophical anthropology 5, no. 2 (2019): 192–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.21146/2414-3715-2019-5-2-192-215.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Sidgwick, Henry. "Utilitarianism." Utilitas 12, no. 3 (November 2000): 253–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820800002879.

Full text

Abstract:

Sidgwick's first explicit statement of the utilitarian position, in an essay presented to the Metaphysical Society in 1873, provides a lucid overview of the errors to be avoided and the terms to be clarified in any adequate account of the subject. As a précis of the comprehensive treatment of utilitarianism that would soon appear in The Methods of Ethics, this essay should serve as a useful guide to that work.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Bassham, Gregory. "Utilitarianism." Teaching Philosophy 23, no. 2 (2000): 210–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/teachphil200023228.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Kaspar, David. "Utilitarianism." Teaching Philosophy 34, no. 1 (2011): 92–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/teachphil201134111.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Gillon, R. "Utilitarianism." BMJ 290, no. 6479 (May 11, 1985): 1411–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.290.6479.1411.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

JAMIESON, DALE. "When Utilitarians Should Be Virtue Theorists." Utilitas 19, no. 2 (June 2007): 160–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820807002452.

Full text

Abstract:

The contrast typically made between utilitarianism and virtue theory is overdrawn. Utilitarianism is a universal emulator: it implies that we should lie, cheat, steal, even appropriate Aristotle, when that is what brings about the best outcomes. In some cases and in some worlds it is best for us to focus as precisely as possible on individual acts. In other cases and worlds it is best for us to be concerned with character traits. Global environmental change leads to concerns about character because the best results will be produced by generally uncoupling my behavior from that of others. Thus, in this case and in this world, utilitarians should be virtue theorists.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Radford, Colin. "Utilitarianism and the Noble Art." Philosophy 63, no. 243 (January 1988): 63–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0031819100043138.

Full text

Abstract:

Utilitarianism tells us that actions are morally right and good if and to the extent that they add to human happiness or diminish human unhappiness. And—or, perhaps, therefore—it also tells us that the best action a person can perform is that which of all the possible actions open to him is the one which makes the greatest positive difference to human happiness. Moreover, as everyone will also remember, utilitarianism further tries to tell us, perhaps intending it as a corollary of that first, main claim, that the motive for an action has nothing to do with its moral rightness or goodness. (This, of course, is just a philosopher's excessive and incorrect way of making the platitudinous point that one may do the wrong thing for the right reason and the right thing for the wrong reason.) But even if, as utilitarians, we accepted the dubious corollary, it would not follow, as many have thought, that utilitarians have no moral interest in motives. For unless, absurdly, a utilitarian believed either that there was never more than a fortuitous connection between on the one hand what we intended to do and on the other what we did and the consequences of what we did, or that, if there were such connections, we could not know of them, he must believe, as a moralist, that the best motive a person can have for performing an action is likely to be the desire to produce the happiest result. Indeed, utilitarians ought to be morally committed, it would seem, to trying to find out as much as they can about the consequences of our actions, e.g. what connections exist, if any, between how we raise children and what sort of adults they grow up to be.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Mori, Osamu. "Axiomatic theories of utilitarianism and weak utilitarianism." Economics Letters 137 (December 2015): 59–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2015.10.019.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Vessel, Jean-Paul. "Desert-Adjusted Utilitarianism, People, and Animals." Environmental Ethics 43, no. 4 (2021): 355–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics20223935.

Full text

Abstract:

Recent decades have witnessed a surge in philosophical attention to the moral standing of non-human animals. Kantians, Neo-Kantians, utilitarians, and radical animal rights theorists have staked their claims in the literature. Here Fred Feldman’s desert-adjusted utilitarianism is introduced into the fray. After canvassing the prominent competitors in the dialectic, a conception of an overall moral ranking (relative to a moral choice scenario) consonant with desert-adjusted utilitarianism is developed. Then the conception’s implications regarding the particular locations of individual people and animals in such rankings across various scenarios is explored. Ultimately, it is argued that when it comes to evaluating whether or not some benefit (or burden) morally ought to be bestowed upon some specific person or animal, this new conception of an overall moral ranking is sensitive to a wider range of morally relevant phenomena than its more prominent competitors.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Sukadana, Dewa Ayu Putri, and Dewa Gde Rudy. "KONTRAK STANDAR DALAM PERKEMBANGAN HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN EKONOMI DARI PERSPEKTIF TEORI UTILITARIANISME." Kertha Semaya : Journal Ilmu Hukum 9, no. 1 (December 16, 2020): 34. http://dx.doi.org/10.24843/ks.2020.v09.i01.p04.

Full text

Abstract:

Tujuan penulisan ini yaitu untuk mengkaji lebih lanjut mengenai penerapan dan berlakunya kontrak standar dari perspektif teori utilitarianisme. Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian hukum normatif, yang berdasarkan dari sisi normatif yang menemukan kebenaran dalam logika keilmuan hukum. Sehingga penelitian hukum normatif merupakan penemuan aturan atau norma hukum yang tercantum dalam peraturan perundang-undangan, perjanjian, putusan pengadilan, serta pendapat para ahli hukum. Jenis pendekatan yang digunakan yaitu pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan analisis konsep hukum. Hasil pembahasannya yaitu penerapan kontrak standar dalam perkembangan hukum pembangunan ekonomi yaitu apabila konsumen telah mencantumkan tanda tangan atas kontrak standar yang telah disodorkan pelaku usaha kepada konsumen, maka hal tersebut berarti konsumen secara tidak langsung telah menyetujuinya. Dilihat dari perpsektif Utilitarianisme maka Ketika Kontrak standar atau Klausula Baku memberikan manfaat bagi para pihak terutama bagi perkembangan hukum ekonomi terutama dalam bidang bisnis maka hal tersebut sesuai dengan aliran Utilitarianisme. The purpose of this paper is to examine further the application and enforcement of the standard contract from the perspective of utilitarianism theory. This study uses normative legal research, which is based on the normative side that finds the truth in the scientific logic of law. So that normative legal research is the discovery of legal rules or norms contained in statutory regulations, agreements, court decisions, and opinions of legal experts. The type approach used is the Statute Approach and Analytical Conseptual Approach. The result of the discussion is the application of standard contracts in the development of economic development law, namely if the consumer has signed a standard contract that has been offered by the business actor to the consumer, then this means that the consumer has indirectly approved it. Seen from the perspective of Utilitarianism, when the standard Contract or Standard Clause provides benefits to the parties, especially for the development of economic law, especially in the business field, it is in accordance with the flow of Utilitarianism.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Conee, Earl, and Torbjorn Tannsjo. "Hedonistic Utilitarianism." Philosophical Review 110, no. 3 (July 2001): 428. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2693653.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Fleurbaey, Marc, and Stéphane Zuber. "Fair Utilitarianism." American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 13, no. 2 (May 1, 2021): 370–401. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/mic.20170234.

Full text

Abstract:

Utilitarianism plays a central role in economics, but there is a gap between theory, where utilitarianism is dominant, and applications, where monetary criteria are often used. For applications, a key difficulty is to define how utilities should be measured and compared. Drawing on Harsanyi’s (1955) approach, we introduce a new normalization of utilities ensuring that: (i) a transfer from a rich population to a poor population is welfare enhancing, and (ii) populations with more risk-averse people have lower welfare. We study some implications of this “fair utilitarianism” for risk sharing, collective risk aversion, and the design of health policy. (JEL D63, D81)

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

West, Henry R. "Liberal Utilitarianism." International Studies in Philosophy 24, no. 1 (1992): 129. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/intstudphil199224149.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Darwish, Bahaa. "Rethinking Utilitarianism." Teaching Ethics 10, no. 1 (2009): 87–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/tej200910119.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Dhillon, Amrita, and Jean-Francois Mertens. "Relative Utilitarianism." Econometrica 67, no. 3 (May 1999): 471–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00033.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Conee, E. "HEDONISTIC UTILITARIANISM." Philosophical Review 110, no. 3 (July 1, 2001): 428–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00318108-110-3-428.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Rossides, Daniel W. "Utilitarianism Modernized." Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie 1, no. 4 (July 14, 2008): 215–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-618x.1964.tb00375.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Macleod, Christopher. "Mill's Utilitarianism." British Journal for the History of Philosophy 17, no. 4 (September 2009): 888–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09608780903135246.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Knowles, Dudley. "Conservative Utilitarianism." Utilitas 12, no. 2 (July 2000): 155–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820800002764.

Full text

Abstract:

The resilience of utilitarian ethics in the face of unremitting criticism can be explained in part by its use of various strategies of indirect utilitarianism. The success of these strategies throws up a distinctive problem: how can one measure the utility of moral rules, large-scale social institutions or character traits distinctive of virtues? Reading Hume as a utilitarian of sorts in his treatment of justice (and rejecting contractarian readings), I explain his conservative endorsement of entrenched social practices as a consequence of his broadly functionalist approach. I claim that this account has enough merit to ground conservativism in ethics as a satisfactory default position. Projects for reform rather than established institutions are the proper object of utilitarian assessment, thus finessing the problem of measurement I opened up initially.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Weinstein, D. "Vindicating Utilitarianism." Utilitas 14, no. 1 (March 2002): 71–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s095382080000340x.

Full text

Abstract:

This essay examines D. G. Ritchie's claim that ‘in Ethics the theory of natural selection has vindicated all that has proved most permanently valuable in Utilitarianism.’ Principally, it endeavours to determine what Ritchie means by ‘Vindicated’ and what kind of utilitarianism he thinks evolutionary theory vindicates. With respect to the kind of utilitarianism vindicated, I will show how he tries to fortify Millian liberal utilitarianism with new liberal values such as self-realization and common good. Ritchie's intellectual debts were eclectic and included mostly Mill, T. H. Green, Hegel and Herbert Spencer.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Bedau, H. A. "Hardin's Utilitarianism." Utilitas 4, no. 2 (November 1992): 317–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820800004568.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Slote, Michael. "OBJECT-UTILITARIANISM." Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 66, no. 1-2 (January 1985): 111–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0114.1985.tb00244.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Hooker, Brad. "Brink, Kagan, Utilitarianism and Self-Sacrifice." Utilitas 3, no. 2 (November 1991): 263–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s095382080000114x.

Full text

Abstract:

Act-utilitarianism claims that one is required to do nothing less than what makes (or can reasonably be expected to make) the largest contribution to overall utility. Critics of this moral theory commonly charge that it is unreasonably demanding. Shelly Kagan and David Brink, however, have recently defended act-utilitarianism against this charge. Kagan argues that act-utilitarianism is right, and its critics wrong, about how demanding morality is. In contrast, Brink argues that, once we have the correct objective account of welfare and once we accept that act-utilitarianism is a criterion of moral rightness, not necessarily a good method for everyday moral thought, act-utilitarianism is not as demanding as its critics claim. I shall argue that Brink's arguments for thinking act-utilitarianism is not so demanding fail. I shall then argue against Kagan that, in comparison with act-utilitarianism, rule-utilitarianism is considerably less demanding and more plausible.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Bustomi, Yazid. "KEBIJAKAN VAKSINASI COVID-19 BAGI MASYARAKAT INDONESIA DITINJAU DARI TEORI UTILITARIANSME." Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum 7, no. 1 (September 2, 2022): 31–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.23920/jbmh.v7i1.747.

Full text

Abstract:

ABSTRAK Pemberian Vaksin COVID-19 merupakan upaya pemerintah untuk memulihkan keadaan negara yang terserang pandemi COVID-19. Sayangnya, upaya pemberian vaksin masih menimbulkan pro kontra. Penelitian ini akan menjelaskan bagaimana kebijakan pemerintah dalam memulihkan keadaan negara yang sedang terdampak pandemi COVID-19, apakah telah dapat memberikan kebahagiaan serta kemanfaatan kepada masyarakat Indonesia yang dikaji melalui teori utilitarianisme. Penelitian ini berjenis yuridis normatif dengan sifat deskriptif analisis. Pendekatan yang digunakan adalah pendekatan undang-undang dan pendekatan konsep. Hasil penelitian menyatakan bahwa kebijakan pemberian vaksin COVID-19 yang dituangkan melalui Peraturan Pemerintah (PP), Peraturan Presiden (Perpres), Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan (Permenkes) dan Surat Edaran (SE) telah seutuhnya memberikan manfaat dan kebahagiaan kepada masyarakat sesuai prinsip utilitarian. Utilitarian merupakan teori moral normatif yang menentukan jika kebaikan merupakan perbuatan yang memaksimalkan kesejahteraan dan kebahagiaan bagi semua individu yang terdampak. Adanya polemik dan persitiwa yang timbul akibat pemberian vaksin bukan menjadi sebuah alasan yang menggagalkan pemerintah dalam usaha memberikan kebahagiaan dan kesejateraan. Karena pada prinsipnya, menurut utilitarian bahwa kebahagiaan serta kesejahteraan dengan jumlah besarlah yang menentukan tindakan atau kebijakan tersebut berhasil atau tidak. Kata kunci: covid-19; utilitarinsime; vaksin. ABSTRACT The provision of the COVID-19 vaccine is the government's effort to restore the state of the country affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Unfortunately, efforts to give vaccines still cause pros and cons. This study will explain how the government's policy in restoring the state of the country that is being affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, whether it has been able to provide happiness and benefit to the Indonesian people, is studied through the theory of utilitarianism. This research is a normative juridical type with descriptive analysis. The approach used is the legal approach and the concept approach. The results of the study stated that the policy for administering the COVID-19 vaccine as outlined in Government Regulations (PP), Presidential Regulations (Perpres), Minister of Health Regulations (Permenkes) and Circulars (SE) had fully provided benefits and happiness to the community according to utilitarian principles. Utilitarianism is a normative moral theory that determines if goodness is an act that maximizes the welfare and happiness of all affected individuals. The existence of polemics and events arising from the administration of vaccines is not a reason to fail the government in its efforts to provide happiness and welfare. Because in principle, according to utilitarians, it is happiness and welfare in large numbers that determine whether the action or policy is successful or not. Keywords: covid-19; utilitariansm; vaccine.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

TURNER, PIERS NORRIS. "Punishment and Discretion in Mill's Utilitarianism." Utilitas 27, no. 2 (February 3, 2015): 165–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820814000326.

Full text

Abstract:

I argue that a notorious passage from Utilitarianism concerning the relationship between morality and blameworthiness need not be an obstacle to a consistent act-utilitarian interpretation of Mill's moral theory. First, the Art of Life provides a framework for reconciling Mill's evaluation of conduct in terms of both expediency and blameworthiness. Like contemporary sophisticated act-utilitarians, Mill treats expediency as the more fundamental category of evaluation. Second, textual evidence suggests that, on Mill's view, evaluations of blameworthiness are not strictly bound by rules, despite rule-ish considerations about punishment and discretion. Third, Mill's own jurisdictional account in terms of competent decision-making remains consistent with the act-utilitarian interpretation.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

SMITH, HOLLY M. "Measuring the Consequences of Rules." Utilitas 22, no. 4 (November 2, 2010): 413–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820810000324.

Full text

Abstract:

Recently two distinct forms of rule-utilitarianism have been introduced that differ on how to measure the consequences of rules. Brad Hooker advocates fixed-rate rule-utilitarianism (which measures the expected value of the rule's consequences at a 90 percent acceptance rate), while Michael Ridge advocates variable-rate rule-utilitarianism (which measures the average expected value of the rule's consequences for all different levels of social acceptance). I argue that both of these are inferior to a new proposal, optimum-rate rule-utilitarianism. According to optimum-rate rule-utilitarianism, an ideal code is the code whose optimum acceptance level is no lower than that of any alternative code. I then argue that all three forms of rule-utilitarianism fall prey to two fatal problems that leave us without any viable form of rule-utilitarianism.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Peart, Sandra J. "Jevons's Applications of Utilitarian Theory to Economic Policy." Utilitas 2, no. 2 (November 1990): 281–306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820800000704.

Full text

Abstract:

The precise nature of W. S. Jevons's utilitarianism as a guiding rule for economic policy has yet to be investigated, and that will be the first issue treated in this paper. While J. A. Schumpeter, for instance, asserted that ‘some of the most prominent exponents of marginal utility’ (including Jevons), were ‘convinced utilitarians’, he did not investigate the further implications for Jevons's policy analysis.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Ng, Yew-Kwang. "Welfarism and Utilitarianism: A Rehabilitation." Utilitas 2, no. 2 (November 1990): 171–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820800000650.

Full text

Abstract:

Utilitarianism seems to be going out of fashion, amidst increasing concerns for issues of freedom, equality, and justice. At least, anti-utilitarian and non-utilitarian moral philosophers have been very active. This paper is a very modest attempt to defend utilitarianism in particular and welfarism (i.e., general utilitarianism or utilitarianism without the sum-ranking aspect) in general. Section I provides an axiomatic defence of welfarism and utilitarianism. Section II discusses the divergences between individual preferences and individual welfares and argues in favour of welfare utilitarianism. Section III criticizes some non-utilitarian principles, including knowledge as intrinsically good, rights-based ethics, and Rawls's second principle. Section IV argues that most objections to welfarism are probably based on the confusion of non-ultimate considerations with basic values. This is discussed with reference to some recent philosophical writings which abound with such confusion. Section V argues that the acceptance of utilitarianism may be facilitated by the distinction between ideal morality and self-interest which also resolves the dilemma of average versus total utility maximization in optimal population theory.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Chung, Hun. "Rawls’s Self-Defeat: A Formal Analysis." Erkenntnis 85, no. 5 (December 7, 2018): 1169–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10670-018-0079-4.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract One of John Rawls’s major aims, when he wrote A Theory of Justice, was to present a superior alternative to utilitarianism. Rawls’s worry was that utilitarianism may fail to protect the fundamental rights and liberties of persons in its attempt to maximize total social welfare. Rawls’s main argument against utilitarianism was that, for such reasons, the representative parties in the original position will not choose utilitarianism, but will rather choose his justice as fairness, which he believed would securely protect the worth of everybody’s basic rights and liberties. In this paper, I will argue that, under close formal examination, Rawls’s argument against utilitarianism is self-defeating. That is, I will argue that Rawls’s own reasons, assumptions, and the many theoretical devices he employs demonstrably imply that the representative parties in the original position will choose utilitarianism instead of justice as fairness.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Pogge, Thomas W. "Utilitarianism and Equality." Midwest Studies in Philosophy 20 (1995): 332–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/msp19952020.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Miller, Richard B. "Actual Rule Utilitarianism." Journal of Philosophy 106, no. 1 (2009): 5–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/jphil200910611.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Nesbitt, Winston. "Utilitarianism and Benevolence." Cogito 6, no. 3 (1992): 170–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/cogito19926340.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Eggleston, Ben, and Dale E. Miller. "India House Utilitarianism." Southwest Philosophy Review 23, no. 1 (2007): 39–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/swphilreview20072314.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Young, Thomas. "Rational Preference Utilitarianism." Philosophy in Context 18 (1988): 19–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philcontext1988183.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Mohan, William J. "Utilitarianism and Beyond." International Studies in Philosophy 18, no. 3 (1986): 92–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/intstudphil198618331.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!