A new argument against rule consequentialism

Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 247-261

  Woodard, Christopher ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Act Consequentialism; Act based reasons; Hooker; Pattern based reasons; Pluralism; Reasons; Rightness; Rule Consequentialism

Indexed keywords

EID: 46849111817     PISSN: 13862820     EISSN: 15728447     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10677-007-9083-5     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Hooker B (2000) Ideal code, real world. Clarendon, Oxford
2. Hooker B, Mason E, Miller D (eds) (2000) Morality, rules, and consequences. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh
3. Hurley SL (1989) Natural reasons. Oxford University Press, New York
4. Kutz C (2000) Complicity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
5. Mulgan T (2001) The demands of consequentialism. Clarendon, Oxford
6. Murphy LB (2000) Moral demands in nonideal theory. Oxford University Press, New York
7. Parfit D (2007) Climbing the mountain. http://individual.utoronto.ca/ stafforini/parfit/parfit_-_climbing_the_mountain.pdf. Cited 21 March 2007
8. Regan D (1980) Utilitarianism and cooperation. Clarendon, Oxford
9. Ridge M (2006) Introducing variable-rate rule-utilitarianism. Philos Q 56:242-253
10. Woodard C (2002) Group-based reasons for action. Ethical Theory Moral Pract 6:215-229
11. Woodard C (2007) Reasons, patterns, and cooperation. Routledge, New York (in press)
12. Zimmerman MJ (1996) The concept of moral obligation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge