consequentialism

(redirected from consequentialists)
Also found in: Dictionary.

consequentialism

(kon″sĕ-kwen′shă-lizm)
The philosophical doctrine that the correctness of a choice is proven only by what that choice produces, rather than why the choice was made or what the agent intended or hoped might occur.
References in periodicals archive ?
The most prominent response from consequentialists has been to emphasize the profound value of friendship for human agents and to remind critics of the distinction between a theory's criterion of tightness and what it recommends as effective decision-making procedures.
Each of these justifications for punishment can be characterized as consequentialist.
As the thought experiment of the original position makes vivid, Rawls agrees with consequentialists that the moral assessment of a social order should be based solely on what overall distribution of goods and ills it, in comparison to its feasible alternatives, tends to produce among its recipients.
Unless they represent themselves as consequentialists (for example) when they are not, they are not misleading anyone.
For character consequentialists (such as Goodman), who accord certain character traits positive value (qua virtues) as well as pride of place in their consequentialism, the disposition of holding ourselves and others morally responsible is arguably supportive of character cultivation (which arguably involves autonomy theoretic self-regulation), which promotes the overall good of sentient beings.
readings tend to be deontologists, not consequentialists.
11) So it is not consequentialism per se that Darwall is criticizing, but rather the arguments that most consequentialists make.
237) Similarly, for purposes of the jus ad bellum, these consequentialists argue that the "destruction of data [which is] designed to be immediately convertible into tangible objects, like banking data, could also be reasonably encompassed within the scope of 'armed attacks.
Indirect consequentialists, such as rule-utilitarians, may have fewer practical disagreements with virtue ethicists, but their positions are still very different at the level of theoretical foundations.
In other words, human beings have the amazing ability to be deontologists and consequentialists at the same time.
25) Neither the content and merit consequentialists, nor their deontic commitments, nor the rhetorical effect they and their commitments have in political, policymaking debates, inevitably push criminal law toward more severe or moderate penalties and policies.
However, any resort to a more objectivist account of well-being would require consequentialists to justify that account and would make their conclusions much more controversial; it would also open up the possibility that the value of these goods might ground an argument against enhancement.