Skip to main content

A Way Out of Pettit's Dilemma

Buy Article:

$43.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Philip Pettit has argued, in ‘Non-consequentialism and Universalizability’, PQ, 50 (2000), pp. 175–90, that there is a tension between non-consequentialism and universalizability. In response I argue that Pettit's argument begs the question against the non-consequentialist, because it falsely assumes that the non-consequentialist must follow the consequentialist in neglecting the crucial distinction between promoting goods and respecting them.
No References
No Citations
No Supplementary Data
No Data/Media
No Metrics

Document Type: Research Article

Affiliations: University of Dundee

Publication date: 2001-01-01

  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more