Brian McElwee | University of Oxford (original) (raw)
Papers by Brian McElwee
Social Theory and Practice, 2010
Utilitas, 2010
Scalar consequentialism, recently championed by Alastair Norcross, holds that the value of an act... more Scalar consequentialism, recently championed by Alastair Norcross, holds that the value of an action varies according to the goodness of its consequences, but eschews all judgements of moral permissibility and impermissibility. I show that the strongest version of scalar ...
Ratio, 2010
Some philosophers, such as Roger Crisp and Alastair Norcross, have recently argued that the tradi... more Some philosophers, such as Roger Crisp and Alastair Norcross, have recently argued that the traditional moral categories of wrongness, permissibility and obligation should be avoided when doing ethical theory. I argue that even if morality does not itself provide reasons for action, the moral categories nevertheless have a central role to play in ethical theory: they allow us to make crucial judgements about how to feel about, and react to, agents who behave in anti-social ways, and they help motivate us to act altruistically.
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 2011
Consequentialism is often charged with demandingness objections which arise in response to the th... more Consequentialism is often charged with demandingness objections which arise in response to the theory's commitment to impartiality. It might be thought that the only way that consequentialists can avoid such demandingness objections is by dropping their commitment to impartialism. However, I outline and defend a framework within which all reasons for action are impartially grounded, yet which can avoid demandingness objections. I defend this framework against what might appear to be a strong objection, namely the claim that anyone who accepts the theory will be practically irrational.
Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society ( …, Jan 1, 2007
A central challenge facing those attracted to consequentialism, and to other impartialist ethical... more A central challenge facing those attracted to consequentialism, and to other impartialist ethical views, is to do justice to our twin intuitions that our ethical theory should be impartial in some important sense but also that it should not be unrealistically demanding. I consider one ...
Philosophical studies, Jan 1, 2010
Abstract I argue that the strongest form of consequentialism is one which rejects the claim that ... more Abstract I argue that the strongest form of consequentialism is one which rejects the claim that we are morally obliged to bring about the best available conse-quences, but which continues to assert that what there is most reason to do is bring about the best available ...
Social Theory and Practice, 2010
Utilitas, 2010
Scalar consequentialism, recently championed by Alastair Norcross, holds that the value of an act... more Scalar consequentialism, recently championed by Alastair Norcross, holds that the value of an action varies according to the goodness of its consequences, but eschews all judgements of moral permissibility and impermissibility. I show that the strongest version of scalar ...
Ratio, 2010
Some philosophers, such as Roger Crisp and Alastair Norcross, have recently argued that the tradi... more Some philosophers, such as Roger Crisp and Alastair Norcross, have recently argued that the traditional moral categories of wrongness, permissibility and obligation should be avoided when doing ethical theory. I argue that even if morality does not itself provide reasons for action, the moral categories nevertheless have a central role to play in ethical theory: they allow us to make crucial judgements about how to feel about, and react to, agents who behave in anti-social ways, and they help motivate us to act altruistically.
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 2011
Consequentialism is often charged with demandingness objections which arise in response to the th... more Consequentialism is often charged with demandingness objections which arise in response to the theory's commitment to impartiality. It might be thought that the only way that consequentialists can avoid such demandingness objections is by dropping their commitment to impartialism. However, I outline and defend a framework within which all reasons for action are impartially grounded, yet which can avoid demandingness objections. I defend this framework against what might appear to be a strong objection, namely the claim that anyone who accepts the theory will be practically irrational.
Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society ( …, Jan 1, 2007
A central challenge facing those attracted to consequentialism, and to other impartialist ethical... more A central challenge facing those attracted to consequentialism, and to other impartialist ethical views, is to do justice to our twin intuitions that our ethical theory should be impartial in some important sense but also that it should not be unrealistically demanding. I consider one ...
Philosophical studies, Jan 1, 2010
Abstract I argue that the strongest form of consequentialism is one which rejects the claim that ... more Abstract I argue that the strongest form of consequentialism is one which rejects the claim that we are morally obliged to bring about the best available conse-quences, but which continues to assert that what there is most reason to do is bring about the best available ...