Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    A theory that contradicts common-sense moral judgements r... — Carmelics
    Home/Consequentialism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Ross's revised view may require revision to common-sense morality

    A theory that contradicts common-sense moral judgements requires revision to common-sense morality

    Consequentialism
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Consequentialism

    Connections

    1 linked claim · 2 topics

    Justice & Punishment2 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Consequentialism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Ross's revised view may require revision to common-sense morality

    Related

    Common-sense morality holds that deathbed promises generate reasons for fulfilme...Ross's 'bonific' requirement entails no reason to fulfil non-bonific deathbed pr...Ross's revised view may require revision to common-sense morality

    Similar

    A theory cannot be decisively refuted by a single counterexample if it...86%Ross's revised view may require revision to common-sense morality85%Ross's revised view may itself require revisions to common-sense moral...84%That interpretation and its explanation fit more easily with common-se...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: william-david-ross
    View source passageHide passage
    Of course, Ross might drop the requirement that the fulfilment of a promise must produce pleasure for the promisee and suggest instead only the fulfilment of a promise be ‘bonific’ for someone (e.g., C) (RG 36; Ross 1928–29: 267–68). This seems to put him at odds with the plain man in other cases, however. Consider a deathbed promise with a different content, that A be buried with C, his wife. Suppose this promise is not bonific. Ross will have to say there is no reason to fulfil it (though perh

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective