Abstract
>As applied to actions, consequentialism can be very roughly described as the view that one ought always to do what will make the outcome best. Consequentialism has been under debate for a very long time, and the literature on the subject is vast.1 Most of this literature concerns the normative plausibility of consequentialism, as compared to rival moral theories. It is frequently disputed whether consequentialism is compatible with a reasonable conception of justice, or with many people’s beliefs that some types of action are always impermissible. Further, some philosophers claim that consequentialism demands too much of us as moral agents. In this essay, these issues will barely be touched upon. My aim is neither to vindicate, nor to refute consequentialism. Instead, I have set myself the more limited task of formulating a version of consequentialism that is plausible as seen from within the general consequentialist framework.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
The term ‘consequentialism’ was invented by G.E.M. Anscombe in 1958. (ANSCOMBE(l).) However, since utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory, (this form of) consequentialism has been discussed, although not under this name, at least since the writings of Jeremy Bentham in the late 18th century. (BENTHAM.) The term ‘ideological theory’ is sometimes used as more or less synonymous to ‘consequentialist theory’. The former term was introduced by C.D. Broad in 1930. (Broad(2).)
Oddie & Milne.
Moore(1).
’Iff will be used throughout, as an abbreviation of ‘if and only if.
Bergström(1), Chapter 2. See also Bergström(2), Bergström(3), Bergström(6), Bergström(7), and Bergström(8).
Prawitz(1), Prawitz(2), and Prawitz(3).
Åqvist.
Björnsson.
Bergström(7), Smith(2), Jackson & Pargetter, Sobel(3), Sobel(4), Feldman, McKinsey.
Tännsjö.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Carlson, E. (1995). Introduction. In: Consequentialism Reconsidered. Theory and Decision Library, vol 20. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8553-8_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8553-8_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4571-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-8553-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive