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
    Defining rightness and wrongness in terms of sanctions ra... — Carmelics
    Home/Consequentialism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Mill's account of duty is an indirect form of utilitarianism, not act utilitarianism.

    Defining rightness and wrongness in terms of sanctions rather than the act itself is an indirect form of utilitarianism.

    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 topic

    Justice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    Act utilitarianism defines the rightness and wrongness of an act in terms of the...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Consequentialism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Mill's account of duty defines rightness and wrongness in terms of the utility o...
    Mill's account of duty is an indirect form of utilitarianism, not act utilitaria...

    Similar

    Act utilitarianism defines the rightness and wrongness of an act in te...88%But the general criterion of sanction utilitarianism is indirect — any...88%Sanction utilitarianism holds that any action is wrong to which one ou...88%Applying a direct utilitarian standard to the application of sanctions...85%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: mill-moral-political
    View source passageHide passage
    Because this account of duty defines the rightness and wrongness of an act, not in terms of its utility, as act utilitarianism does, but in terms of the utility of applying sanctions to the conduct, it is an indirect form of utilitarianism. Because justice is a species of duty, it inherits this indirect character (also see Lyons 1994). Because it makes the deontic status of conduct depend upon the utility of sanctioning that conduct in some way, we might call this conception of duty, justice, an

    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