-
328The demands of consequentialismOxford University Press. 2001.Tim Mulgan presents a penetrating examination of consequentialism: the theory that human behavior must be judged in terms of the goodness or badness of its consequences. The problem with consequentialism is that it seems unreasonably demanding, leaving us no room for our own aims and interests. In response, Mulgan offers his own, more practical version of consequentialism--one that will surely appeal to philosophers and laypersons alike.
-
176The Future of UtilitarianismIn James Maclaurin (ed.), Rationis Defensor, . 2012.Climate change has obvious practical implications. It will kill millions of people, wipe out thousands of species, and so on. My question in this paper is much narrower. How might climate change impact on moral theory – and especially on the debate between utilitarians and their non-utilitarian rivals? I argue that climate change creates serious theoretical difficulties for non-utilitarian moral theories – especially those that based morality or justice on any contract or bargain for reciprocal …Read more
-
174Future people: a moderate consequentialist account of our obligations to future generationsOxford University Press. 2006.What do we owe to our descendants? How do we balance their needs against our own? Tim Mulgan develops a new theory of our obligations to future generations, based on a new rule-consequentialist account of the morality of individual reproduction. He also brings together several different contemporary philosophical discussions, including the demands of morality and international justice. His aim is to produce a coherent, intuitively plausible moral theory that is not unreasonably demanding, even w…Read more
-
146The Reverse Repugnant ConclusionUtilitas 14 (3): 360. 2002.Total utilitarianism implies Parfit's repugnant conclusion. For any world containing ten billion very happy people, there is a better world where a vast number of people have lives barely worth living. One common response is to claim that life in Parfit's Z is better than he suggests, and thus that his conclusion is not repugnant. This paper shows that this strategy cannot succeeed. Total utilitarianism also implies a reverse repugnant conclusion. For any world where ten billion people have live…Read more
-
143How Satisficers Get Away with MurderInternational Journal of Philosophical Studies 9 (1). 2001.Traditional Consequentialism is based on a demanding principle of impartial maximization. Michael Slote's 'Satisficing Consequentialism' aims to reduce the demands of Consequentialism, by no longer requiring us to bring about the best possible outcome. This paper presents a new objection to Satisficing Consequentialism. We begin with a simple thought experiment, in which an agent must choose whether to save the lives of ten innocent people by using a sand bag or by killing an innocent person. Th…Read more
-
143Slote's Satisficing ConsequentialismRatio 6 (2). 1993.The article discusses Michael Slote's Satisficing Consequentialism, which is the view that moral agents are not required to maximise the good, but merely to produce a sufficient amount of good. It is argued that Satisficing Consequentialism is not an acceptable alternative to Maximising Consequentialism. In particular, it is argued that Satisficing Consequentialism cannot be less demanding in practice than Maximising Consequentialism without also endorsing a wide range of clearly unacceptable ac…Read more
-
107Liam Murphy, Moral Demands in Nonideal Theory, New York, Oxford University Press, 2000, pp. viii + 168Utilitas 15 (1): 113. 2003.
-
105Utilitarianism for a Broken WorldUtilitas 27 (1): 92-114. 2015.Drawing on the author's recent bookEthics for a Broken World, this article explores the philosophical implications of the fact that climate change – or something like it – might lead to abroken worldwhere resources are insufficient to meet everyone's basic needs, and where our affluent way of life is no longer an option. It argues that the broken world has an impact, not only on applied ethics, but also on moral theory. It then explores that impact. The article first argues that the broken world…Read more
-
103Answering to Future People: Responsibility for Climate Change in a Breaking WorldJournal of Applied Philosophy 34 (2). 2017.Our everyday notions of responsibility are often driven by our need to justify ourselves to specific others – especially those we harm, wrong, or otherwise affect. One challenge for contemporary ethics is to extend this interpersonal urgency to our relations with those future people who are harmed or affected by our actions. In this article, I explore our responsibility for climate change by imagining a possible ‘broken future’, damaged by the carbon emissions of previous generations, and then a…Read more
-
93Review: Christopher Woodard: Reasons, Patterns, and Cooperation (review)Mind 118 (470): 539-542. 2009.
-
93Beyond Theism and Atheism: Axiarchism and Ananthropocentric PurposivismPhilosophy Compass 12 (6). 2017.Two familiar worldviews dominate Western philosophy: materialist atheism and Abrahamic theism. One exciting development in recent philosophy of religion is the exploration of alternatives to both theism and atheism. This paper explores two alternatives: axiarchism and ananthropocentrism. Drawing on the long tradition of Platonism, axiarchists such as John Leslie, Derek Parfit and Nicholas Rescher posit a direct link between goodness and existence. The goodness of a possible world is what makes i…Read more
-
82Transcending the infinite utility debateAustralasian Journal of Philosophy 80 (2). 2002.An infinite future thus threatens to paralyze utilitarianism. Utilitarians need principled ways to determine which possible infinite futures are better or worse. In this article, I discuss a recent suggestion of Peter Vallentyne and Shelly Kagan. I conclude that the best way forward for utilitarians is, in fact, to by-pass the infinite utility debate altogether. (edited)
-
79III—Ethics for Possible FuturesProceedings of the Aristotelian Society 114 (1pt1): 57-73. 2014.I explore the moral implications of four possible futures: a broken future where our affluent way of life is no longer available; a virtual future where human beings spend their entire lives in Nozick's experience machine; a digital future where humans have been replaced by unconscious digital beings; and a theological future where the existence of God has been proved. These futures affect our current ethical thinking in surprising ways. They raise the importance of intergenerational ethics, alt…Read more
-
79How should utilitarians think about the future?Canadian Journal of Philosophy 47 (2-3): 290-312. 2017.Utilitarians must think collectively about the future because many contemporary moral issues require collective responses to avoid possible future harms. But current rule utilitarianism does not accommodate the distant future. Drawing on my recent books Future People and Ethics for a Broken World, I defend a new utilitarianism whose central ethical question is: What moral code should we teach the next generation? This new theory honours utilitarianism’s past and provides the flexibility to adapt…Read more
-
75Roger Crisp and Brad Hooker , Well-being and Morality: Essays in Honour of James Griffin , pp. x + 316 (review)Utilitas 16 (3): 326-331. 2004.
-
74A Non-proportional Hybrid Moral TheoryUtilitas 9 (3): 291. 1997.A common objection to consequentialism is that it makes unreasonable demands upon moral agents, by failing to allow agents to give special weight to their own personal projects and interests. A prominent recent response to this objection is that of Samuel Scheffler, who seeks to make room for moral agents by building agent-centred prerogatives into a consequentialist moral theory. In this paper, I present a new objection to Scheffler's account. I then sketch an improved prerogative, which avoids…Read more
-
56Answering to Future People: Responsibility for Climate Change in a Breaking WorldJournal of Applied Philosophy 35 (3): 532-548. 2018.Our everyday notions of responsibility are often driven by our need to justify ourselves to specific others – especially those we harm, wrong, or otherwise affect. One challenge for contemporary ethics is to extend this interpersonal urgency to our relations with those future people who are harmed or affected by our actions. In this article, I explore our responsibility for climate change by imagining a possible ‘broken future’, damaged by the carbon emissions of previous generations, and then a…Read more
-
55Charting just futures for Aotearoa New Zealand: philosophy for and beyond the Covid-19 pandemicJournal of the Royal Society of New Zealand. forthcoming.The global pandemic needs to mark a turning point for the peoples of Aotearoa New Zealand. How can we make sure that our culturally diverse nation charts an equitable and sustainable path through and beyond this new world? In a less affluent future, how can we ensure that all New Zealanders have fair access to opportunities? One challenge is to preserve the sense of common purpose so critical to protecting each other in the face of Covid-19. How can we centre what we have learnt about resilience…Read more
-
53Reply to John turriInternational Journal of Philosophical Studies 13 (4). 2005.This Article does not have an abstract
-
45Critical Notice (review)Canadian Journal of Philosophy 34 (3): 443-459. 2004.In this exceptional new book, Jeff McMahan sets out to provide such an account. Along the way, he offers nuanced and illuminating accounts of personal identity, human nature, the badness of death, the wrongness of killing, the rights of animals, abortion, and euthanasia. This book is a major contribution to both moral theory and applied ethics, and makes a strong case for the relevance of the former to the latter. It is also beautifully written and a joy to read.
-
45The Future of PhilosophyMetaphilosophy 44 (3): 241-253. 2013.In this article the editor of the Philosophical Quarterly briefly outlines the editorial process at that journal; explains why it is foolhardy to attempt to predict the future of philosophy; and, finally, attempts such a prediction. Drawing on his recent book Ethics for a Broken World, he argues that climate change, or some other disaster, may lead to a broken world where the optimistic assumptions underlying contemporary philosophy no longer apply. He argues that the possibility of a broken wor…Read more
-
42Rule consequentialism and non-identityIn David Wasserman & Melinda Roberts (eds.), Harming Future Persons, Springer. pp. 115--134. 2009.