Moral Status and the Direction of Duties

被引:19
作者
May, Simon Cabulea [1 ]
机构
[1] Florida State Univ, Tallahassee, FL 32306 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1086/667835
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Gopal Sreenivasan's "hybrid theory" states that a moral duty is directed toward art individual because her interests justify the assignment of control over the duty. An alternative "plain theory" states that the individual's interests justify the duty itself. I argue that a strong moral status constraint explains Sreenivasan's instrumentalization objection to a Razian plain theory but that his own model violates this constraint. I suggest how both approaches can be reformulated to satisfy the constraint, and I argue that a reformulated plain theory can also avoid an insufficiency objection. The hybrid approach consequently has no clear advantage over the plain approach.
引用
收藏
页码:113 / 128
页数:16
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1997, MORAL STATUS OBLIGAT, P3
[2]  
[Anonymous], FUNDAMENTAL LEGAL CO
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2005, OXFORD J LEGAL STUDI, V25, P257
[4]  
Feinberg J., 1970, J VALUE ENQUIRY, V4, P243, DOI [10.1007/BF00137935, DOI 10.1007/BF00137935]
[5]  
Kamm Frances, 2007, INTRICATE ETHICS RIG, P237
[6]  
RAZ J, 1984, MIND, V93, P194
[7]  
Raz J., 1984, OXFORD J LEGAL STUD, V4, P1
[8]  
RAZ J, 1994, ETHICS PUBLIC DOMAIN, P29
[9]  
Raz Joseph, 1986, MORALITY FREEDOM, P166
[10]   Duties and Their Direction [J].
Sreenivasan, Gopal .
ETHICS, 2010, 120 (03) :465-494