To consequentialize a non-consequentialist theory, take whatever considerations that the non-consequentialist theory holds to be relevant to determining the deontic statuses of actions and insist that those considerations are relevant to determining the proper ranking of outcomes. In this way, the consequentialist can produce an ordering of outcomes that when combined with her criterion of Tightness yields the same set of deontic verdicts that the non-consequentialist theory yields. In this paper, I argue that any plausible non-consequentialist theory can be consequen-tialized. I explain the motivation for the consequentializing project and defend it against recent criticisms by Mark Schroeder and others.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||35|
|Journal||Pacific Philosophical Quarterly|
|Publication status||Published - Mar 2007|
ASJC Scopus subject areas