عنوان مقاله [English]
Received: 21/10/2018 | Accepted: 13/01/2019
In recent decades, one of the challenges facing morality is its alleged conflict with what are among the most important factors of human happiness. It is claimed that adopting moral theories may alienate one from that which makes one’s life worthwhile, such as affections, personal commitments, as well as from other people. In his paper, “Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality”, Railton attempts to answer this objection from a consequentialist point of view. For this purpose, he has formulated a new version of consequentialism, which he calls “sophisticated consequentialism”. This version, he thinks, avoids the necessity of alienation. This paper first provides an explanation of Railton’s formulation of consequentialism and the goes on to criticize the solution he has devised for the problem of alienation by using this formulation and while showing certain incoherencies in the proposed formulation, rejects it as a new version of consequentialism. It is also argued that there are problems in how Railton’s account solves the problem of alienation which ultimately render it non-consequentialist.
* University of Shahid Beheshti ׀ firstname.lastname@example.org
🞕 Hojjat, M. (2019). Morality And AlienationA Criticism of Railton’s Version of Consequentialism. The Journal of Philosophical - Theological Research, 21(79), 121۔ 142. https://doi.org/ 10.22091/pfk.2019.3696.1977.
- Brink, D. O. (1986). Utilitarian morality and the personal point of view. The Journal of Philosophy, 83(8), 417-438. doi: jphil198683846
- Cocking, D. & Oakley, J. (1995). Indirect consequentialism, friendship and the problem of alienation. Ethics, 106(1), 86-111.
- Howard-Snyder, F. (1997). The rejection of objective consequentialism. Utilitas, 9(2), 241-248. Doi: 10.1017/s0953820800005306
- Jackson, F. (1991). Decision-theoretic consequentialism and the nearest and dearestobjection. Ethics, 101(3), 461-482. doi: 10.1086/293312
- Miller, D. E. (2013). Reactive Attitudes and the Hare–Williams Debate: Towards a New Consequentialist Moral Psychology. The Philosophical Quarterly, 64(254), 39-59. doi: 10.1093/pq/pqt010
- Parfit, D. (1984). Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Railton, P. (Spring, 1984). Alienation, Consequentialism and the Demands of Morality. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 13(2) 134-171.
- Ridge, M. (2001). Agent-neutral Consequentialism from the Inside-out: Concern for Integrity without Self-indulgence. Utilitas, 13(2), 236-254. doi: 10.1017/S0953820800003150
- Schacht, R. (1971). Alienation. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
- Scheffler, S. (1994). The rejection of consequentialism: A philosophical investigation of the considerations underlying rival moral conceptions. doi: 10.1086/292695
- Sidgwick, H. (1907). The Methods of Ethics. (7th Edition). London: Macmillan.
- Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2015). Consequentialism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2015). Retrieved from
- Smart, J. J. & Williams, B. (1973). Utilitarianism: For and against. Cambridge University Press.
- Stocker, M. (1977). The schizophrenia of modern ethical theories. The Journal of philosophy. 73 (14). 453-466.