The Disutility of Act-Utilitarianism

1973 ◽  
Vol 23 (93) ◽  
pp. 289 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. L. Mackie
Keyword(s):  
Act Utilitarianism

Act-Utilitarianism and Collective Action

Ethics ◽  
1973 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Chandler
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
Act Utilitarianism

Sacrificing Credibility for Sleaze

2016 ◽  
pp. 1267-1282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenn Burleson Mackay ◽  
Erica Bailey
Keyword(s):  
News Media ◽  
Source Credibility ◽  
Online News ◽  
News Stories ◽  
Soft News ◽  
Credibility Scale ◽  
Act Utilitarianism ◽  
Traditional Stories

This chapter uses an experiment to analyze how mainstream journalists' use of sensationalized or tabloid-style writing techniques affect the credibility of online news. Participants read four news stories and rated their credibility using McCroskey's Source Credibility Scale. Participants found stories written with a tabloid style less credible than more traditional stories. Soft news stories written with a tabloidized style were rated more credible than hard news stories that also had a tabloidized style. Results suggest that online news media may damage their credibility by using tabloidized writing techniques to increase readership. Furthermore, participants were less likely to enjoy stories written in a tabloidized style. The authors conclude by utilizing act utilitarianism to argue that tabloidized writing is an unethical journalistic technique.

On the purported inconsistency of act-utilitarianism

1975 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 297-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jules L. Coleman ◽  
Michael Perloff
Keyword(s):  
Act Utilitarianism

Act utilitarianism and the moral fanaticism argument

1984 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-226
Author(s):  
Mark Timmons
Keyword(s):  
Act Utilitarianism

Is Act-Utilitarianism Self-Defeating?

1972 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Singer
Keyword(s):  
Act Utilitarianism

scholarly journals The Foundations of Godwinian Impartiality

Utilitas ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
ROBERT LAMB
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Moral Worth ◽  
The Other ◽  
William Godwin ◽  
Political Theories ◽  
Act Utilitarianism ◽  
Case Based

William Godwin is often cited in contemporary philosophical discussions of ethical impartiality, within which he functions as a sort of shorthand for a particularly crude and extreme act-utilitarianism, one that contains no foundational commitments other than the maximizing of some conception of the general good. This article offers a reinterpretation of Godwin's argument, by focusing closely on the ambiguous nature of its justificatory foundations. Although utilitarian political theories seem to have two possible justifications available to them – egalitarian and teleological – there has been little effort to establish which one of them Godwin's argument for impartiality relies on. This problem becomes more complicated when it is acknowledged that Godwin actually provides two different justifications for impartiality, only one of which is consequentialist. The other seems to make a case based on the recognition of moral worth and virtue. This is something confirmed through analysis of Godwin's writings on equality and suggests his political theory is more complex than most philosophers are willing to admit.

A Note on Act Utilitarianism

1964 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 243
Author(s):  
Charles Landesman
Keyword(s):  
Act Utilitarianism

Rights Based Paretianism

1988 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 527-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Vallentyne
Keyword(s):  
Decision Theory ◽  
Ethical Theory ◽  
Human Welfare ◽  
Act Utilitarianism

An ethical theory is axiological just in case it makes the permissibility of actions depend solely on considerations of goodness. Act utilitarianism is the paradigm axiological theory. An ethical theory is a pure rights theory just in case it judges an action permissible if and only if it violates no one’s rights. Libertarianism is a paradigm pure rights theory. I shall formulate and defend a type of axiological theory that, unlike act utilitarianism, is sensitive in a new and interesting way to whether rights are violated.Let us start by briefly considering the strengths and weakness of act utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism judges an action permissible just in case it maximizes social (e.g., total or average) welfare. It has many attractive features. It is a clearly formulated theory that draws on the machinery of decision theory. It takes a tough minded approach to morality: always focusing on the outcomes of actions. And it takes human welfare very seriously. The axiological theory I shall defend will have all these features.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document