This article analyzes Joshua Greene’s defense of a consequentialist approach to ethics, through aseries of debunking arguments targeting characteristically deontological judgments and common-sense intuitions. This project is not new in ethics, but Greene develops his predecessors’speculations by means of the recent findings in moral psychology. Greene’s conclusion is amoral revolution about the conception of harm and the duties to help strangers. The article focuses also on Frances Kamm and Guy Kahane’s critique to Greene’s theses and method. Kahane’s critique is used to give a subjectivist interpretation of Greene’s account which may constitute an unexplored answer to some methodological worries.
|Numero di pagine||19|
|Rivista||DIRITTO & QUESTIONI PUBBLICHE|
|Stato di pubblicazione||Published - 2020|