Abstract
As an indirect ethical theory, rule consequentialism first evaluates moral codes in terms of how good the consequences of their general adoption are and then individual actions in terms of whether or not the optimific code authorises them. There are three well-known and powerful objections to rule consequentialism’s indirect structure: the ideal world objection, the rule worship objection, and the incoherence objection. These objections are all based on cases in which following the optimific code has suboptimal consequences in the real world. After outlining the traditional objections and the cases used to support them, this paper first constructs a new hybrid version of consequentialism that combines elements of both act and rule consequentialism. It then argues that this novel view has sufficient resources for responding to the previous traditional objections to pure rule consequentialism.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Number of pages | 17 |
Journal | Moral Philosophy and Politics |
Early online date | 9 Feb 2024 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 9 Feb 2024 |
Bibliographical note
AcknowledgementsI thank the Choice Group at the London School of Economics, Aaron Salomon, and the anonymous referees of Moral Philosophy and Politics for helpful comments on the earlier drafts of this manuscript.
Keywords
- ethical theory
- rule consequentialism
- act consequentialism
- ideal world objection