Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Philosophy and religion

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Philosophy and religion

Conceptions of choice and conceptions of autonomy

Article Abstract:

The rational choice theory describes choice as selecting the best option from a set of alternatives, as from a menu. This model is inherently frustrating, since the set of alternatives is not itself a matter of choice, the idea of ranking preferences has no limit and every choice has a cost in lost opportunities. Another conception of choice is based on intrinsic value instead of comparison; in this view choosing is willing, as in falling in love. A better account of autonomy, which accommodates issues of personal identity, commitment and moral autonomy, derives from this concept of choice.

Author: Dan-Cohen, Meir
Publisher: University of Chicago Press
Publication Name: Ethics
Subject: Philosophy and religion
ISSN: 0014-1704
Year: 1992
Will, Will (Philosophy)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Social freedom and the test of moral responsibility

Article Abstract:

The responsibility view of social freedom views obstacles as constraints on freedom if and only if there is an agent morally responsible for the obstacle's existence or nonsuppression. However, the test of moral responsibility offered by S.I. Benn and W.L. Weinstein is too narrow, W.E. Connolly's is too broad and D. Miller's is either trivial or wrong depending on whether a permissive or narrow interpretation is adopted. A plausible definition assigns moral responsibility for nonsuppression of an obstacle when a reasonable person could have been expected to suppress the obstacle.

Author: Kristjansson, Kristjan
Publisher: University of Chicago Press
Publication Name: Ethics
Subject: Philosophy and religion
ISSN: 0014-1704
Year: 1992
Responsibility, Liberty, Freedom

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Rewarding regret

Article Abstract:

Regret can function as a means to an end, but most philosophers will reject regret as causing unnecessary pain. Humanists would value regret for its preventive effect on unsociable behavior, and biologists might defend regret as a reminder of counterfactual outcomes. Internal and external reasons can change how regret operates. Action guidance is not the best criterion of adequacy.

Author: Sorensen, Roy
Publisher: University of Chicago Press
Publication Name: Ethics
Subject: Philosophy and religion
ISSN: 0014-1704
Year: 1998
Psychological aspects, Decision making, Decision-making (Ethics), Repentance

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Analysis, Beliefs, opinions and attitudes, Choice (Psychology), Autonomy (Philosophy)
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: The influence of collegiate and corporate codes of conduct on ethics-related behavior in the workplace. The ethical context in organizations: influences on employee attitudes and behaviors
  • Abstracts: The fourth wave: the ethics of corporate downsizing. Corporate soulcraft in the age of brutal markets. Ethical challenges for business in the new millennium: corporate social responsibility and models of management morality
  • Abstracts: Insider trading and the social contract. Social contracting as a trust-building process of network governance
  • Abstracts: Business ethics in Islamic context: perspectives of a Muslim business leader. Contemporary Jewish perspectives on business ethics: the contributions of Meir Tamari and Moses L. Pava: a review essay
  • Abstracts: Bodyworlds and the ethics of using human remains: a preliminary discussion. Elective ventilation
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.