Feasibility as a Constraint on ‘Ought All-Things-Considered’, But not on ‘Ought as a Matter of Justice’

Datos Bibliográficos

ID10691630
AutoresNicholas Southwood (0000-0002-5308-8814, Australian National University, autor de correspondencia)
Año2019
Volumen69
Número276
Páginas598-616
Fecha de publicación2019-07-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaThe Philosophical Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0031-8094 • E-ISSN: 1467-9213
EditorialOxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1093/pq/pqz012
OpenAlexW2931375635
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas5
Referencias citadas34

It is natural and relatively common to suppose that feasibility is a constraint on what we ought to do all-things-considered but not a constraint on what we ought to do as a matter of justice. I show that the combination of these claims entails an implausible picture of the relation between feasibility and desirability given an attractive understanding of the relation between what we ought to do as a matter of justice and what we ought to do all-things-considered.

Constraint (computer-aided design) · Economic Justice · Economics · Epistemology · Law and economics · Mathematical economics · Natural (archaeology) · Neoclassical economics · Relation (database) · Sociology · Computer Science · Free Will and Agency · History · Mathematics · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics