Epistemic status: Random thought, not examined too closely.
I was thinking a little while ago about the idea that there are three basic moral frameworks (consequentialism, virtue ethics, deontology) with lots of permutations. It occurred to me that in some sense they form a cycle, rather than one trying to be fundamental. I don’t think I’ve ever considered or encountered that idea before. I highly doubt this is in any way novel, and am curious how common it is or where I can find good sources that explore it or something similar.
Events are judged by their consequences.
Actions/choices are judged by their adherence to virtues, which are considered virtues because of the types of consequences they engender.
Priority conflicts among virtues are judged by a given or agreed-upon set of rules, which say what the virtues are and how to enact them.
Conflicts between rules are judged by expectations of the consequences for future events of enacting the virtues/choices/actions prescribed by said rules.
Epistemic status: Random thought, not examined too closely.
I was thinking a little while ago about the idea that there are three basic moral frameworks (consequentialism, virtue ethics, deontology) with lots of permutations. It occurred to me that in some sense they form a cycle, rather than one trying to be fundamental. I don’t think I’ve ever considered or encountered that idea before. I highly doubt this is in any way novel, and am curious how common it is or where I can find good sources that explore it or something similar.
Events are judged by their consequences.
Actions/choices are judged by their adherence to virtues, which are considered virtues because of the types of consequences they engender.
Priority conflicts among virtues are judged by a given or agreed-upon set of rules, which say what the virtues are and how to enact them.
Conflicts between rules are judged by expectations of the consequences for future events of enacting the virtues/choices/actions prescribed by said rules.