Mill kant essays

Theories of value are often classified in terms of the subjective-objective distinction. Subjectivist theories hold that value is dependent on producing pleasure, being desired, or preferred, or more abstractly, on what would be preferred in certain ideal conditions. Utilitarianism theories of value, such as hedonism and its descendents, desire and preference satisfaction theories, are paradigmatic subjectivist accounts of value. By contrast, objectivist theories of value say that certain things and states are valuable independently whether they produce pleasure, are desired, or preferred. Perfectionism is an objectivist theory of value according to which goodness depends on the actualization or perfection of human nature. According to Aristotle , for instance, fulfilling the function (ergon) of a human being involves the exercise and perfection of its rational capacities. It follows that the good life for man involves the attainment of virtue or excellence (arête) in reason.

Social and political philosophy

  • James Anderson (liberalism, intuitions, moral theory)
  • Richard Arneson (justice, equality, etc)
  • Gustaf Arrhenius (democracy, value, etc)
  • Chris Bertram (justice)
  • Harry Brighouse (philosophy of education)
  • John P. Clark (social ecology)
  • Simon Clarke (paternalism, etc)
  • Joshua Cohen (political philosophy, democracy)
  • . Conces (nationalism, ethics, Locke, etc)
  • Rowan Cruft (rights)
  • Frank Cunningham (democracy, etc)
  • Dale Dorsey (justice, poverty, consequentialism, meta-ethics)
  • Jon Elster (social/political philosophy, rationality)
  • Stephen Esquith (democracy, war)
  • David Estlund (justice, free speech, etc)
  • Colin Farrelly (justice, agreement, genetics, etc)
  • Randy Friedman (democracy, Judaism, pragmatism, etc)
  • William Gay (politics of language, Wittgenstein, nuclear warfare, etc)
  • Gerald Gaus (liberalism, political philosophy, ethics)
  • Jürgen Habermas (political philosophy, etc)
  • Joseph Heath (social philosophy, policy, practical reason)
  • Frank Hindriks (collective freedom, action, etc)
  • Lester Hunt (political philosophy, applied ethics, Nietzsche)
  • Duncan Ivison (postcolonial philosophy, etc)
  • Aaron James (justice, constructivism, trade, etc)
  • David Kahane (social and political philosophy)
  • Simon Keller (political philosophy)
  • Roderick Long (libertarianism, ethics, etc)
  • Ishani Maitra (free speech, silencing, testimony, assertion)
  • Richard Miller (global justice, patriotism, etc)
  • Veronique Munoz Darde (equality, reasons, etc)
  • Jan Narveson (anarchism, welfare, abortion)
  • Michael Otsuka (equality, libertarianism, harm)
  • Philip Pettit (social political philosophy, collective intentionality, M&E, etc)
  • Thomas Pogge (global justice, poverty)
  • Louis Pojman (equality, philosophy of religion)
  • Timothy Rayner (democracy, poverty, etc)
  • Julian Reiss (philosophy of social science, economics, medicine)
  • Mathias Risse (political philosophy, decision theory, Nietzsche)
  • Eric Roark (justice, democracy, epistemology, religion)
  • Paul Roth (philosophy of social science, naturalism)
  • Sean Sayers (Marxism, radical philosophy)
  • Samuel Scheffler (equality, justice, terrorism)
  • Matthew Smith (rights, trust, law)
  • Tony Smith (globalization, Marxism)
  • Kyle Swan (liberty, economics, meta-ethics)
  • Robert Talisse (political philosophy, pragmatism)
  • Siegfried Van Duffel (human rights, sovereignty)
  • Alex Voorhoeve (equal opportunity, transitivity, interviews)
  • Sheldon Wein (justice, co-operation, philosophy of law, etc)
  • Leif Wenar (rights, property, Rawls, global justice, etc)
  • Caroline West (free speech, pornography, personal identity, meta-ethics)
  • Simon Wigley (political philosophy)
  • Jonathan Wolff (political philosophy, Marx)
  • Christopher Zurn (political philosophy)
Philosophy of economics

If most people who live along a short river toss their garbage in the river, so that it is always full of garbage, then your tossing your own garbage in the river makes no difference to the river, and it saves the inconvenience of driving a few miles to the dump. So consequentialism would seem to support your tossing your garbage in the river. But if everyone hauled their garbage a few miles to the dump instead, in a year or two everyone would have a nice river, which is much more valuable to each person than the minor convenience of not having to haul one’s garbage to the dump. In this case, if each person follows consequentialism, the results are predictably worse than if everyone does something else instead. Thus consequentialism seems to defeat its own purpose.

Mill kant essays

mill kant essays


mill kant essaysmill kant essaysmill kant essaysmill kant essays