Abstract
This Chapter elucidates and defends the following thesis: A theory is a normative ethical theory just in case it claims that a certain set of normative requirements ranges over (a) all actions the performance of which would advance or set back persons' interests, or (b) any states of affairs the occurrence of which would advance or set back such interests, or (c) any ways of life the pursuit of which would do the same, or (d) any policies the pursuit of which would do the same, or (e) any character traits the continued manifestation of which would advance or set back such interests. We shall call this the Universal Claims Thesis. This Thesis is the first premise of the dissertation's argument, the Argument from Claims about Interest-Affecting Normative Requirement. The Chapter first explicates the key concepts employed in the Thesis. It then defends the Thesis on the ground that it, considered as a theory about normative ethical theories, possesses more of the theoretical virtues of consistency with observation, explanatory utility, and coherence with widely held theoretical commitments than any of the competing theories of normative ethical theory.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.