Moral Moments

Rematch

by Joel Marks

Philosophical problems are called perennial with good reason: One can ponder and discuss them throughout the year, and year after year, and never resolve them. They are peculiar in that respect, as are the people who like them for that very reason: philosophers. As the constant and patient readers of this column know, a favorite perennial of yours truly is consequentialism, the idea that the consequences of an act (or of a way of living, etc.) determine its moral rightness. In Issue 52 I tried to provide a knock-down non-consequentialist argument in favor of a ‘No’ answer; but now my opponent (or more courteously I should say ‘interlocutor’) the consequentialist requests a rematch.

This article is available to subscribers only.

If you are a subscriber please log in below.

Email:
Password:

To buy or renew a subscription please visit the Shop.

If you are a subscriber you can contact us to create an account.