Hume on the Moral Obligation to Justice

Hume Studies 36 (1):25-50 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Our understanding of the philosophers of the past is not always assisted by the attempt to fit them under one or other of the categories that we currently use to map the philosophical landscape. We have grown used to the idea that there are three principal kinds of moral theory—deontological and broadly Kantian, consequentialist and broadly Millian, virtue-theoretic and broadly Aristotelian—and so historical approaches to moral philosophy tend to orientate themselves by assuming that each and every object of study must count as one or other of these kinds of moralist. This is unfortunate. It is particularly unfortunate in respect of the moral philosophy of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Philosophers.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-06-06

Downloads
171 (#138,824)

6 months
15 (#210,649)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

James A. Harris
University of St. Andrews

Citations of this work

Consensus, Compromise, Justice and Legitimacy.Enzo Rossi - 2013 - Critical Review of Social and International Political Philosophy 16 (4):557-572.
Consensus, compromise, justice and legitimacy.Enzo Rossi - 2013 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 16 (4):557-572.
Hume’s Justice and the Problem of the Missing Motive.Ian Cruise - 2024 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 11.
Critical Notice.Kyla Ebels-Duggan - 2011 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 41 (4):549-573.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references