|
Doing the Best We Can: An Essay in Informal Deontic Logic
|
(Buch) |
Dieser Artikel gilt, aufgrund seiner Grösse, beim Versand als 3 Artikel!
Lieferstatus: |
i.d.R. innert 14-24 Tagen versandfertig |
Veröffentlichung: |
April 1986
|
Genre: |
Philosophie |
ISBN: |
9789027721648 |
EAN-Code:
|
9789027721648 |
Verlag: |
Springer Netherlands |
Einband: |
Gebunden |
Sprache: |
English
|
Dimensionen: |
H 241 mm / B 160 mm / D 19 mm |
Gewicht: |
565 gr |
Seiten: |
264 |
Zus. Info: |
HC runder Rücken kaschiert |
Bewertung: |
Titel bewerten / Meinung schreiben
|
Inhalt: |
Several years ago I came across a marvelous little paper in which Hector-Neri Castaneda shows that standard versions of act utilitarian l ism are formally incoherent. I was intrigued by his argument. It had long seemed to me that I had a firm grasp on act utilitarianism. Indeed, it had often seemed to me that it was the clearest and most attractive of normative theories. Yet here was a simple and relatively uncontrover sial argument that showed, with only some trivial assumptions, that the doctrine is virtually unintelligible. The gist of Castaneda's argument is this: suppose we understand act utilitarianism to be the view that an act is obligatory if and only if its utility exceeds that of each alternative. Suppose it is obligatory for a certain person to perform an act with two parts - we can call it 'A & B'. Then, obviously enough, it is also obligatory for this person to perform the parts, A and B. If act utilitarianism were true, we appar ently could infer that the utility of A & B is higher than that of A, and higher than that of B (because A & B is obligatory, and the other acts are alternatives to A & B). |
|