The Natural and the Publick Good: Two Puzzles in Hutcheson's Axiology

IF 0.4 0 PHILOSOPHY
D. Dorsey
{"title":"The Natural and the Publick Good: Two Puzzles in Hutcheson's Axiology","authors":"D. Dorsey","doi":"10.3366/jsp.2022.0331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Whatever the finer details, Francis Hutcheson is clearly some form of proto-, quasi-, pseudo-utilitarian. But for any utilitarian, the full picture of their moral theory will only emerge once we understand their theory of the good. What, according to said utilitarian, is the nature of happiness? How do we aggregate happiness across persons? In this paper, I discuss two important aspects of Hutcheson's utilitarian axiology each with their own puzzles of interpretation. The first involves Hutcheson's theory of happiness or the ‘natural good’. Hutcheson appears to vacillate between a quantitative hedonism (according to which the value of a pleasure just concerns its intrinsic pleasurableness; its intensity and duration) and a qualitative hedonism (according to which pleasures are not simply judged given their intensity and duration, but also a further qualitative operator). The second concerns Hutcheson's aggregative axiology. Hutcheson appears to offer three inconsistent approaches to understanding the overall good. Bringing these puzzles to light, I think, brings forward a number of challenges in understanding the normative ethics of a key figure in the development of utilitarian moral thought.","PeriodicalId":41417,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scottish Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Scottish Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/jsp.2022.0331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Whatever the finer details, Francis Hutcheson is clearly some form of proto-, quasi-, pseudo-utilitarian. But for any utilitarian, the full picture of their moral theory will only emerge once we understand their theory of the good. What, according to said utilitarian, is the nature of happiness? How do we aggregate happiness across persons? In this paper, I discuss two important aspects of Hutcheson's utilitarian axiology each with their own puzzles of interpretation. The first involves Hutcheson's theory of happiness or the ‘natural good’. Hutcheson appears to vacillate between a quantitative hedonism (according to which the value of a pleasure just concerns its intrinsic pleasurableness; its intensity and duration) and a qualitative hedonism (according to which pleasures are not simply judged given their intensity and duration, but also a further qualitative operator). The second concerns Hutcheson's aggregative axiology. Hutcheson appears to offer three inconsistent approaches to understanding the overall good. Bringing these puzzles to light, I think, brings forward a number of challenges in understanding the normative ethics of a key figure in the development of utilitarian moral thought.
自然与公共利益:哈奇森价值论中的两个谜题
无论细节如何,弗朗西斯·赫奇森显然是某种形式的原始、准、伪功利主义。但对于任何功利主义者来说,只有当我们理解他们的善理论时,他们道德理论的全貌才会显现出来。按照功利主义的说法,幸福的本质是什么?我们如何在人与人之间聚合幸福感?在本文中,我讨论了哈奇森功利主义价值论的两个重要方面,每个方面都有各自的解释难题。第一个涉及哈奇森关于幸福或“自然善”的理论。Hutcheson似乎在数量享乐主义(根据这一理论,快乐的价值只涉及其内在的愉悦性、强度和持续时间)和质量享乐主义之间摇摆不定(根据这两种理论,快乐不仅仅是根据其强度和持续时间来判断的,还有一个进一步的质量算子)。第二个问题是哈奇森的集合价值论。Hutcheson似乎提供了三种不一致的方法来理解整体利益。我认为,揭示这些困惑,对理解功利主义道德思想发展中的一个关键人物的规范伦理提出了许多挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信