Doing the Best We Can: An Essay in Informal Deontic Logic: 35 (Philosophical Studies Series, 35) - Tapa dura

Feldman, Fred

 
9789027721648: Doing the Best We Can: An Essay in Informal Deontic Logic: 35 (Philosophical Studies Series, 35)
Tapa dura
ISBN 10: 9027721645 ISBN 13: 9789027721648
Editorial: Springer, 1986

Sinopsis

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).

"Sinopsis" puede pertenecer a otra edición de este libro.

Reseña del editor

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).

"Sobre este título" puede pertenecer a otra edición de este libro.

Editorial
Springer
Año de publicación
1986
Idioma
Inglés
ISBN 10 
9027721645
ISBN 13 
9789027721648
Encuadernación
Tapa dura
Número de páginas
264
Contacto del fabricante
no disponible
Persona responsable
CMN Printpool Inh. Mathis Neumann
https://www.also.com/ec/cms5/en_6000/6000/index.jsp

Friedrich-Karl-Str. 9
Hamburg
Alemania

Otras ediciones populares con el mismo título

9789401085311: Doing the Best We Can: An Essay in Informal Deontic Logic: 35 (Philosophical Studies Series)

Edición Destacada

ISBN 10:  9401085315 ISBN 13:  9789401085311
Editorial: Springer, 2011
Tapa blanda