Jackson

contemporaryAnalytic Philosophy

b. 1943

Frank Jackson is an Australian philosopher known for his influential contributions to philosophy of mind, ethics, and metaphysics. He is best known for the knowledge argument (Mary's Room) against physicalism and his work with Robert Pargetter on ethical decision-making under uncertainty.

WWikipedia SEPStanford Encyclopedia

Notable Achievements

Formulated the knowledge argument (Mary's Room) against physicalism

Developed with Pargetter a probabilistic approach to ethical decision-making under uncertainty

Defended moral functionalism and conceptual analysis in ethics

Authored 'From Metaphysics to Ethics: A Defence of Conceptual Analysis'

Distinguished Professor at Australian National University

Positions & Arguments

Moral Responsibility

premise

Jackson and Pargetter's view simultaneously generates an obligation to stay home at t1

claim

Jackson and Pargetter's view does not assess an act's deontic status in the procedural manner that Goldman's (G*1) or Sobel's (S) assesses deontic status

claim

At t1, Jones is obligated (from the t1–t3 act-set) to go to the office, then go to the faculty meeting, and then vote for the language requirement

claim

Doug is not obligated at 2 pm to eat a healthy meal at 6 pm

premise

An agent is obligated to perform whichever immediately performable act produces the best outcome

premise

What would happen if Jones were to stay home is better than what would happen if Jones were to go to the office

premise

Jackson and Pargetter's view generates an obligation to perform the t1–t3 act-set that includes voting for the language requirement

premise

Jackson and Pargetter's view, like view (G), determines deontic status by comparing outcomes of option sets rather than through a procedural assessment

premise

Staying home at t1 and going to the office at t1 (as required by the t1–t3 act-set) cannot both be performed

claim

At t1, Jones is obligated (from the set of immediately performable acts) to stay home

premise

An agent is obligated to perform the act-set whose occurrence produces the best outcome compared to alternative act-sets from the same option set

premise

From the set of immediately performable acts available to Jones at t1, staying home has the highest value

claim

Jackson and Pargetter's contextualist actualism implies the possibility of obligations that cannot be jointly fulfilled

premise

From the set of all t1–t3 act-sets available to Jones at t1, the option with the highest value includes Jones's voting for the language requirement at t3

Justice & Punishment

premise

Jackson and Pargetter's view simultaneously generates an obligation to stay home at t1

claim

Doug is not obligated at 2 pm to eat a healthy meal at 6 pm

premise

Jackson and Pargetter's view generates an obligation to perform the t1–t3 act-set that includes voting for the language requirement

premise

Staying home at t1 and going to the office at t1 (as required by the t1–t3 act-set) cannot both be performed

Consequentialism

claim

Jackson and Pargetter's view does not assess an act's deontic status in the procedural manner that Goldman's (G*1) or Sobel's (S) assesses deontic status

claim

At t1, Jones is obligated (from the t1–t3 act-set) to go to the office, then go to the faculty meeting, and then vote for the language requirement

premise

An agent is obligated to perform whichever immediately performable act produces the best outcome

premise

What would happen if Jones were to stay home is better than what would happen if Jones were to go to the office