Rule Versus Act Utilitarianism

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 220
Keyword(s):  
1973 ◽  
Vol 23 (93) ◽  
pp. 289 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. L. Mackie
Keyword(s):  

Ethics ◽  
1973 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Chandler

2016 ◽  
pp. 1267-1282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenn Burleson Mackay ◽  
Erica Bailey

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.


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

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

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

Utilitas ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
ROBERT LAMB

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.


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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document