|
| << previous | next >> |
Journal description
All volumes of the corresponding journal
All issues of the corresponding volume
All articles of the corresponding issues
Details for article 76 of 134 found articles
| Title: |
How Satisficers Get Away with Murder |
| Author: |
Mulgan, Tim |
| Appeared in: |
International journal of philosophical studies |
| Paging: | Volume 9 (2001) nr. 1 pages 41-46 |
| Year: |
2001-02-01 |
| Contents: |
Traditional Consequentialism is based on a demanding principle of impartial maximization. Michael Slote's 'Satisficing Consequentialism' aims to reduce the demands of Consequentialism, by no longer requiring us to bring about the best possible outcome. This paper presents a new objection to Satisficing Consequentialism. We begin with a simple thought experiment, in which an agent must choose whether to save the lives of ten innocent people by using a sand bag or by killing an innocent person. The main aim of the paper is to demonstrate that, if it is to avoid making unreasonable demands, Satisficing Consequentialism must allow such an agent to kill. It is argued that this result is much more counter-intuitive than the fact that Maximizing Consequentialism permits agents to kill in order to produce the best consequences. The conclusion is that Satisficing Consequentialism is not an acceptable moral theory. |
| Publisher: |
Routledge |
| Source file: |
Elektronische Wetenschappelijke Tijdschriften |
Details for article 76 of 134 found articles
| << previous | next >> |