A moral philosophy paper recently written by me, presenting a new liar paradox-like argument about contradictions within consequentialism:
https://philpapers.org/rec/IONCJP
#philosophy #ethic #consequentialism #deontology #metaethics #morality #paradox #research
Beautiful paper and idea. This provides a constraint on ethics where constraints and criteria for rational ethical theory choice are hard to come by. I wonder if we could maintain some element of consequences matters but go agent-relative by defining a domain of responsibility and just saying that the judging agent is not responsible for what the trickster element does. This also reminds me of a thought experiment that Kane B, YouTuber, mentions in this video:
https://youtu.be/puK7XuPU_KQ
@jlou Thank you very much for your time, I am very pleased.
I share your intuition, I think this paradox and conflict between deontology and consequentialism implies the use of a sort of "middle way" theory of responsability where some cases make perfect sense like Judith Jarvis Thomson's Violonist argument.
I've also seen some videos by Kane B while roaming on the philosophy youtube and I tought he shared similar views about metaetics. I've tried to reach him but he hasn't responded yet.
Arthur Ionescu
J Lou