Abstract
The ideas that put primary weight on (a) what I do, and (b) what happens as a result of what I do, emerge in philosophical views sometimes called ‘absolutism’ and ‘consequentialism’. Of course these may be names for nothing clear or coherent; nevertheless it is convenient to use the labels as a kind of shorthand. To begin with absolutism: absolutists are supposed to claim that there are some things one ought never to do — for instance, torture another person. There are four obscurities about any such claim: briefly (a) who the ‘one’ is supposed to be, (b) what ‘ought’ is taken as meaning, (c) whether the wrongness consists in doing something, or something being done, or something happening, and (d) just what the ‘thing’ is that one ought not to do (e.g. torture).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1987 John Wilson
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wilson, J. (1987). ‘Absolutism’ and ‘Consequentialism’. In: A Preface to Morality. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-18934-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-18934-2_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-43992-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-18934-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)