Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Arts and Humanities

Research Collection School of Social Sciences

Series

Agent-relative

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

Relativized Rankings, Matthew Hammerton Dec 2020

Relativized Rankings, Matthew Hammerton

Research Collection School of Social Sciences

In traditional consequentialism the good is position-neutral. A single evaluative ranking of states of affairs is correct for everyone, everywhere regardless of their positions. Recently, position-relative forms of consequentialism have been developed. These allow for the correct rankings of states to depend on connections that hold between the state being evaluated and the position of the evaluator. For example, perhaps being an agent who acts in a certain state requires me to rank that state differently from someone else who lacks this connection. In this chapter several different kinds of position-relative rankings related to agents, times, physical locations, and possible …


Is Agent-Neutral Deontology Possible?, Matthew Hammerton Dec 2017

Is Agent-Neutral Deontology Possible?, Matthew Hammerton

Research Collection School of Social Sciences

It is commonly held that all deontological moral theories are agent-relative in the sense that they give each agent a special concern that she does not perform acts of a certain type rather than a general concern with the actions of all agents. Recently, Tom Dougherty has challenged this orthodoxy by arguing that agent-neutral deontology is possible. In this article I counter Dougherty's arguments and show that agent-neutral deontology is not possible.


Patient-Relativity In Morality, Matthew Hammerton Oct 2016

Patient-Relativity In Morality, Matthew Hammerton

Research Collection School of Social Sciences

It is common to distinguish moral rules, reasons, or values that are agent-relative from those that are agent-neutral. One can also distinguish moral rules, reasons, or values that are moment-relative from those that are moment-neutral. In this article, I introduce a third distinction that stands alongside these two distinctions—the distinction between moral rules, reasons, or values that are patient-relative and those that are patient-neutral. I then show how patient-relativity plays an important role in several moral theories, gives us a better understanding of agent-relativity and moment-relativity, and provides a novel objection to Derek Parfit’s “appeal to full relativity” argument.