Fittingness: The sole normative primitive

87Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Your institution provides access to this article.

Abstract

This paper draws on the 'Fitting Attitudes' analysis of value to argue that we should take the concept of fittingness (rather than value) as our normative primitive. I will argue that the fittingness framework enhances the clarity and expressive power of our normative theorising. Along the way, we will see how the fittingness framework illuminates our understanding of various moral theories, and why it casts doubt on the Global Consequentialist idea that acts and (say) eye colours are normatively on a par. We will see why even consequentialists, in taking rightness to be in some sense determined by goodness, should not think that rightness is conceptually reducible to goodness. Finally, I will use the fittingness framework to explicate the distinction between consequentialist and deontological theories, with particular attention to the contentious case of Rule Consequentialism. © 2012 The Author.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Chappell, R. Y. (2012). Fittingness: The sole normative primitive. Philosophical Quarterly, 62(249), 684–704. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9213.2012.00075.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free