Cargando…

Liberal Utilitarianism—Yes, But for Whom?

In his important paper “Just Better Utilitarianism,” Matti Häyry reminds his readers that liberal utilitarianism can offer a basis for moral and political choices in bioethics and thus could be helpful in decisionmaking.(1) Although I agree with the general defense of Häyry’s liberal utilitarianism,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: RÄSÄNEN, JOONA
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7711342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33032664
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000894
_version_ 1783618123645059072
author RÄSÄNEN, JOONA
author_facet RÄSÄNEN, JOONA
author_sort RÄSÄNEN, JOONA
collection PubMed
description In his important paper “Just Better Utilitarianism,” Matti Häyry reminds his readers that liberal utilitarianism can offer a basis for moral and political choices in bioethics and thus could be helpful in decisionmaking.(1) Although I agree with the general defense of Häyry’s liberal utilitarianism, in this commentary, I urge Häyry to say more on who belongs to our moral community. I challenge Häyry’s principle of actual or prospective existence. I also argue that Häyry should say more on human beings at the “margin of life” (such as fetuses and other mindless humans). I claim that debate over whether some form of utilitarianism is superior over other moral theories is not as important as answering the question underlying these issues: Who belongs to our moral community?
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7711342
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77113422020-12-03 Liberal Utilitarianism—Yes, But for Whom? RÄSÄNEN, JOONA Camb Q Healthc Ethics Commentary In his important paper “Just Better Utilitarianism,” Matti Häyry reminds his readers that liberal utilitarianism can offer a basis for moral and political choices in bioethics and thus could be helpful in decisionmaking.(1) Although I agree with the general defense of Häyry’s liberal utilitarianism, in this commentary, I urge Häyry to say more on who belongs to our moral community. I challenge Häyry’s principle of actual or prospective existence. I also argue that Häyry should say more on human beings at the “margin of life” (such as fetuses and other mindless humans). I claim that debate over whether some form of utilitarianism is superior over other moral theories is not as important as answering the question underlying these issues: Who belongs to our moral community? Cambridge University Press 2020-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7711342/ /pubmed/33032664 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000894 Text en © Cambridge University Press 2020 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Commentary
RÄSÄNEN, JOONA
Liberal Utilitarianism—Yes, But for Whom?
title Liberal Utilitarianism—Yes, But for Whom?
title_full Liberal Utilitarianism—Yes, But for Whom?
title_fullStr Liberal Utilitarianism—Yes, But for Whom?
title_full_unstemmed Liberal Utilitarianism—Yes, But for Whom?
title_short Liberal Utilitarianism—Yes, But for Whom?
title_sort liberal utilitarianism—yes, but for whom?
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7711342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33032664
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180120000894
work_keys_str_mv AT rasanenjoona liberalutilitarianismyesbutforwhom