Secrecy in consequentialism: A defence of esoteric morality

37Citations
Citations of this article
30Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Sidgwick's defence of esoteric morality has been heavily criticized, for example in Bernard Williams's condemnation of it as 'Government House utilitarianism.' It is also at odds with the idea of morality defended by Kant, Rawls, Bernard Gert, Brad Hooker, and T.M. Scanlon. Yet it does seem to be an implication of consequentialism that it is sometimes right to do in secret what it would not be right to do openly, or to advocate publicly. We defend Sidgwick on this issue, and show that accepting the possibility of esoteric morality makes it possible to explain why we should accept consequentialism, even while we may feel disapproval towards some of its implications. © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

De Lazari-Radek, K., & Singer, P. (2010, March). Secrecy in consequentialism: A defence of esoteric morality. Ratio. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9329.2009.00449.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