Analiza i Egzystencja

ISSN: 1734-9923     eISSN: 2300-7621    OAI    DOI: 10.18276/aie.2019.48-01

Lista wydań / 48 (2019)
Institutional Function Consequentialism

Autorzy: Krzysztof Saja ORCID
Uniwersytet Szczeciński
Słowa kluczowe: etyka prawo polityka konsekwencjalizm deontologia metodologia etyki funkcjonalizm
Rok wydania:2019
Liczba stron:21 (5-25)
Cited-by (Crossref) ?:


In this paper, I present a new account of normative ethics that I call Institutional Function Consequentialism. It is a form of indirect consequentialism that focuses on the optimal harmony of institutions rather than on rules, motives or acts. It proposes one normative foundation for all social order that is composed of different institutions. This account can also be seen as method of consequentializing different rival theories such as Aristotelianism, stoicism, utilitarianism, contractarianism and contractualism.
Pobierz plik

Plik artykułu


1.Anscombe, G. E. M. (1958). Modern Moral Philosophy. Philosophy, 33(124), 1–19.
2.Brandt, R. (1963). Toward a Credible Form of Utilitarianism. W H.-N. Castaneda & G. Nakhnikian (Red.), Morality and the Language of Conduct (s. 107–43).
3.Brandt, R. (1992a). Fairness to Indirect Optimific Theories in Ethics. W Morality, utilitarianism, and rights (s. 137–157). Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
4.Brandt, R. (1992b). Morality and its Critics. W Morality, utilitarianism, and rights (s. 73–92). Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
5.Cummiskey, D. (1996). Kantian Consequentialism. New York: Oxford University Press.
6.Darwall, S. (2006). The Second-Person Standpoint: Morality, Respect, and Accountability. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press.
7.Dworkin, R., Nagel, T., Nozick, R., Rawls, J., & Thomson, J. J. (1997, marzec 27). Assisted Suicide: The Philosophers’ Brief. The New York Review of Books. Pobrano z
8.Gauthier, D. P. (1986). Morals by Agreement. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
9.Goodin, R. E. (1995). Utilitarianism as a Public Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
10.Goodin, R. E. (Red.). (1998). The theory of institutional design. Cambridge University Press.
11.Graham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 366–385.
12.Greenberg, Y. K. (Red.). (2008). Encyclopedia of Love in World Religions (T. 2). Santa Barbara, Denver, Oxford: ABC-CLIO.
13.Haidt, J. (2007). The New Synthesis in Moral Psychology. Science, 316(5827), 998–1002.
14.Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York: Pantheon Books.
15.Haidt, J., & Graham, J. (2009). Planet of the Durkheimians, Where Community, Authority, and Sacredness are Foundations of Morality. W Social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Pobrano z
16.Hampton, J. (1986). Hobbes and the Social Contract Tradition. Cambridge University Press.
17.Hare, R. M. (1981). Moral Thinking: Its Levels, Methods and Point. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
18.Hellman, D. (2008). When Is Discrimination Wrong? Harvard University Press.
19.Hooker, B. (2000). Ideal Code, Real World: a Rule-Consequentialist Theory of Morality. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
20.Hooker, B., & Fletcher, G. (2008). Variable Versus Fixed-Rate Rule-Utilitarianism. The Philosophical Quarterly, 58(231), 344–352.
21.Hosseini, S. R. (2013). Meaning in life: a Wittgensteinian approach. University of Johannesburg. Pobrano z
22.Hurka, T. (1996). Perfectionism (1st ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
23.Kagan, S. (1989). The Limits of Morality. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
24.Kagan, S. (2000). Evaluative focal points. W B. Hooker, E. Mason, & D. Miller (Red.), Morality, Rules, and Consequences: a Critical Reader (s. 134–155). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
25.Kamm, F. (2007). Intricate Ethics: Rights, Responsibilities, and Permissible Harm. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
26.Kavka, G. (1986). Hobbesian Moral and Political Theory. Princeton University Press.
27.Korsgaard, C. (1996). Creating the Kingdom of Ends. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
28.Lousie, J. (2004). Relativity of Value and the Consequentialist Umbrella. The Philosophical Quarterly, 54(217), 518–536.
29.MacIntyre, A. (1981). After Virtue: a Study in Moral Theory. University of Notre Dame Press.
30.Mulgan, T. (2005). The Demands of Consequentialism. Oxford University Press.
31.Murphy, L. B. (1998). Institutions and the Demands of Justice. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 27(4), 251–291.
32.Narveson, J. (1988). The Libertarian Idea. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
33.Noddings, N. (1984). Caring, a Feminine Approach to Ethics & Moral Education. University of California Press.
34.Parfit, D. (1997). Equality and Priority. Ratio, 10(3), 202–221.
35.Parfit, D. (2011). On What Matters (T. I). Oxford University Press.
36.Portmore, D. (2007). Consequentializing Moral Theories. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 88(1), 39–73.
37.Portmore, D. (2009). Consequentializing. Philosophy Compass, 4(2), 329–347.
38.Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: The Belknap.
39.Ridge, M. (2006). Introducing Variable-Rate Rule-Utilitarianism. The Philosophical Quarterly, (223), 242–253.
40.Ridge, M. (2009). Consequentialist Kantianism. Philosophical Perspectives, 23(1), 421–438.
41.Scanlon, T. (1998). What We Owe to Each Other. Cambridge Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
42.Singer, P. (1977). Animal Liberation. New York: Avon Books.
43.Singer, P. (2009). The Life You Can Save. New York: Random House.
44.Williams, G. (2006). Infrastructures of Responsibility: the Moral Tasks of Institutions. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 23(2), 207–221.