En kritik av Brad Hookers regelkonsekventialism

This paper focuses on Brad Hooker's moral theory which is a version of rule-consequentialism and is developed in Ideal Code, Real World. The paper starts with a reconstruction of the theory. I then go on to criticize Hooker on mainly two points. The first point is on the matter of the "dis...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Hadrous, Mohammed
Format: Others
Language:Swedish
Published: Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för kultur och kommunikation 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-154656
id ndltd-UPSALLA1-oai-DiVA.org-liu-154656
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-UPSALLA1-oai-DiVA.org-liu-1546562019-03-02T05:36:40ZEn kritik av Brad Hookers regelkonsekventialismsweA Critique of Brad Hooker's Rule-ConsequentialismHadrous, MohammedLinköpings universitet, Institutionen för kultur och kommunikation2019Brad HookerRule-ConsequentialismAbsolute Rule-ConsequentialismRelative Rule-ConsequentialismBrad HookerRegelkonsekventialismAbsolut RegelkonsekventialismRelativ RegelkonsekventialismPhilosophyFilosofiThis paper focuses on Brad Hooker's moral theory which is a version of rule-consequentialism and is developed in Ideal Code, Real World. The paper starts with a reconstruction of the theory. I then go on to criticize Hooker on mainly two points. The first point is on the matter of the "disaster-clause". I present here a modified example from Leonard Kahn: a choice between saving your own city with all members of your family and friends versus another arbitrary city with a few more people living in it. Hooker does not say much about the extent of a person's obligations and priority towards family and friends. So, it is worth asking: does the theory cohere with what we know about our human nature, and would Hooker's theory and a plausible account human nature reach the same conclusion as far as this particular example is concerned? The second point focuses on the issue of the internalization condition. This comes in two varieties: one can recommend internalization of one code by everyone (absolute rule-consequentialism), on the one hand, or internalization of different codes for different groups (relative rule-consequentialism). Which one should be preferred? I will argue for nation-relative rule-consequentialism, and will do so from a consequentialist perspective. I will do this by first arguing that there exist differences in people's conventional morality – something Hooker does not seem to take into consideration to a sufficient degree. I will try to show that if we have differences in conventional morality, then the reasons for preferring national internalization of codes are stronger from a global perspective. Student thesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesistexthttp://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-154656application/pdfinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
collection NDLTD
language Swedish
format Others
sources NDLTD
topic Brad Hooker
Rule-Consequentialism
Absolute Rule-Consequentialism
Relative Rule-Consequentialism
Brad Hooker
Regelkonsekventialism
Absolut Regelkonsekventialism
Relativ Regelkonsekventialism
Philosophy
Filosofi
spellingShingle Brad Hooker
Rule-Consequentialism
Absolute Rule-Consequentialism
Relative Rule-Consequentialism
Brad Hooker
Regelkonsekventialism
Absolut Regelkonsekventialism
Relativ Regelkonsekventialism
Philosophy
Filosofi
Hadrous, Mohammed
En kritik av Brad Hookers regelkonsekventialism
description This paper focuses on Brad Hooker's moral theory which is a version of rule-consequentialism and is developed in Ideal Code, Real World. The paper starts with a reconstruction of the theory. I then go on to criticize Hooker on mainly two points. The first point is on the matter of the "disaster-clause". I present here a modified example from Leonard Kahn: a choice between saving your own city with all members of your family and friends versus another arbitrary city with a few more people living in it. Hooker does not say much about the extent of a person's obligations and priority towards family and friends. So, it is worth asking: does the theory cohere with what we know about our human nature, and would Hooker's theory and a plausible account human nature reach the same conclusion as far as this particular example is concerned? The second point focuses on the issue of the internalization condition. This comes in two varieties: one can recommend internalization of one code by everyone (absolute rule-consequentialism), on the one hand, or internalization of different codes for different groups (relative rule-consequentialism). Which one should be preferred? I will argue for nation-relative rule-consequentialism, and will do so from a consequentialist perspective. I will do this by first arguing that there exist differences in people's conventional morality – something Hooker does not seem to take into consideration to a sufficient degree. I will try to show that if we have differences in conventional morality, then the reasons for preferring national internalization of codes are stronger from a global perspective.
author Hadrous, Mohammed
author_facet Hadrous, Mohammed
author_sort Hadrous, Mohammed
title En kritik av Brad Hookers regelkonsekventialism
title_short En kritik av Brad Hookers regelkonsekventialism
title_full En kritik av Brad Hookers regelkonsekventialism
title_fullStr En kritik av Brad Hookers regelkonsekventialism
title_full_unstemmed En kritik av Brad Hookers regelkonsekventialism
title_sort en kritik av brad hookers regelkonsekventialism
publisher Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för kultur och kommunikation
publishDate 2019
url http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-154656
work_keys_str_mv AT hadrousmohammed enkritikavbradhookersregelkonsekventialism
AT hadrousmohammed acritiqueofbradhookersruleconsequentialism
_version_ 1718989891757408256