1978The Journal of PhilosophyRequires access

On Being Morally Considerable

Kenneth E. Goodpaster

Open publisher page 636 citations

Abstract

Modern moral philosophy has taken ethical egoism as its principle foil for developing what can fairly be called a humanistic perspective on value and obligation. That is, both Kantian and Humean approaches to ethics tend to view the philosophical challenge as that of providing an epistemological and motivational generalization of an agent’s natural self-interested concern. This chapter discusses four distinctions that must be kept clear needing attention. The first is that between moral rights and moral considerability. A second distinction is that between what might be called a criterion of moral considerability and a criterion of moral significance. The third distinction turns on the difference between questions of intelligibility and questions of normative substance. The fourth is that there is another respect in which the present inquiry involves framework questions rather than questions of application.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Modern moral philosophy has taken ethical egoism as its principle foil for developing what can fairly be called a humanistic perspective on value and obligation. That is, both Kantian and Humean approaches to ethics tend to view the philosophical challenge as that of providing an epistemological and motivational generalization of an agent’s natural self-interested concern. This chapter discusses four distinctions that must be kept clear needing attention. The first is that between moral rights and moral considerability. A second distinction is that between what might be called a criterion of moral considerability and a criterion of moral significance. The third distinction turns on the difference between questions of intelligibility and questions of normative substance. The fourth is that there is another respect in which the present inquiry involves framework questions rather than questions of application.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 636 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Modern moral philosophy has taken ethical egoism as its principle foil for developing what can fairly be called a humanistic perspective on value and obligation. That is, both Kantian and Humean approaches to ethics tend to view the philosophical challenge as that of providing an epistemological and motivational generalization of an agent’s natural self-interested concern. This chapter discusses four distinctions that must be kept clear needing attention. The first is that between moral rights and moral considerability. A second distinction is that between what might be called a criterion of moral considerability and a criterion of moral significance. The third distinction turns on the difference between questions of intelligibility and questions of normative substance. The fourth is that there is another respect in which the present inquiry involves framework questions rather than questions of application.

Key concepts: Analytic philosophy, Philosophy, Contemporary philosophy, Epistemology, Sociology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
On Being Morally Considerable — Research Paper | ScholarLens