LEXICAL PRIORITY AND THE PROBLEM OF RISK

被引:16
作者
Huemer, Michael [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Colorado, Dept Philosophy, Boulder, CO 80309 USA
关键词
LOGIC; MILL;
D O I
10.1111/j.1468-0114.2010.01370.x
中图分类号
B [哲学、宗教];
学科分类号
01 ; 0101 ;
摘要
Some theories of practical reasons incorporate a lexical priority structure, according to which some practical reasons have infinitely greater weight than others. This includes absolute deontological theories and axiological theories that take some goods to be categorically superior to others. These theories face problems involving cases in which there is a non-extreme probability that a given reason applies. In view of such cases, lexical-priority theories are in danger of becoming irrelevant to decision-making, becoming absurdly demanding, or generating paradoxical cases in which each of a pair of actions is permissible yet the pair is impermissible.
引用
收藏
页码:332 / 351
页数:20
相关论文
共 40 条
  • [1] DEONTOLOGY, INDIVIDUALISM, AND UNCERTAINTY: A REPLY TO JACKSON AND SMITH
    Aboodi, Ron
    Borer, Adi
    Enoch, David
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY, 2008, 105 (05) : 259 - 272
  • [2] [Anonymous], THEORIES RIGHTS
  • [3] Anscombe G.E. M., 2001, The doctrine of double effect, P50
  • [4] Anscombe G.E.M., 1981, COLLECTED PHILOS PAP, V3
  • [5] Aquinas T., 1920, The summa theologiae of St. Thomas Aquinas
  • [6] Bentham J., 1996, Collected Works of Jeremy Bentham
  • [7] BOOHER T, 2007, STUDIES HIST ETHICS
  • [8] WHO IS ENTITLED TO DOUBLE EFFECT
    BOYLE, J
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICINE AND PHILOSOPHY, 1991, 16 (05): : 475 - 494
  • [9] BRINK DO, 1992, PHILOS PUBLIC AFF, V21, P67
  • [10] BRODY H, 1976, ETHICAL DECISIONS ME