Premium
CONSEQUENTIALIZING MORAL THEORIES
Author(s) -
PORTMORE DOUGLAS W.
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
pacific philosophical quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.914
H-Index - 32
eISSN - 1468-0114
pISSN - 0279-0750
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-0114.2007.00280.x
Subject(s) - deontic logic , consequentialism , epistemology , philosophy , set (abstract data type) , computer science , programming language
To consequentialize a non‐consequentialist theory, take whatever considerations that the non‐consequentialist theory holds to be relevant to determining the deontic statuses of actions and insist that those considerations are relevant to determining the proper ranking of outcomes. In this way, the consequentialist can produce an ordering of outcomes that when combined with her criterion of rightness yields the same set of deontic verdicts that the non‐consequentialist theory yields. In this paper, I argue that any plausible non‐consequentialist theory can be consequentialized. I explain the motivation for the consequentializing project and defend it against recent criticisms by Mark Schroeder and others.