统合效用主义的六个奥义特色

统合效用主义由作者于1991年提出,与传统的行动效用主义和R.B.勃朗特脱(R.B.Brandt)以及J.C.哈桑尼(JohnC.Harsanyi)等的规则效用主义不同。本文概括了统合效用主义的六个特色。即:(一)它本质上是唯物论的、经验的和非形而上的;(二)它以人为目的,所以效用主义是人本化的;(三)它是软线的、灵活的,而非绝对的;(四)它的价值取向是主观主义的;(五)效用是唯一可以量化和计算的维度;(六)行动层面是唯一可以计算效用的层面。这六个奥义特色可作为效用主义是否可以成立的充要条件,并可据以区别统合效用主义与其它的效用主义。     

效用主义与分配正义

效用主义的分配模式是对正义的重大挑战。首先,效用主义的效用原则有两个版本,但是通过分析可以发现它们存在着不一致,而且在分配过程中这两个版本都会导致某些无法接受的分配结果。其次,即便做出某些修正,效用主义的分配方式也往往会遗漏分配正义中的一项极为重要的价值——平等。最后,效用主义的分配方式无法真正实现分配正义,因为在分配正义中,效用并非总是一种压倒性的因素。     

效用主义概念系统的主要类型及其创新分析

效用主义伦理学一直面临一个现实困难,就是“效用究竟是什么”的问题。在这一问题上,各派效用主义理论都有自己的概念体系。早期的效用主义者用快乐、幸福来代表和计量效用;中期的效用主义者用福利、增量社会价值来表示效用的实质概念;而现代派则主要用“偏好及其满足”的内涵来定义效用的实质。本文分析和总结了效用概念在理论和实践上的发展及延变,并且用心理学的知情意概念系统对它们做了新的分类和分析。     

转型期公共场域诚信缺失的理论思考——基于转型的一种视角

转型期的诚信缺失主要发生在公共场域而不是在私人场域;由于社会结构的变迁,人们的交往、交易不断从“熟人社会”延伸至“公共场域”,但公共场域缺少相应的诚信伦理的约束,失信行为增多;另外,转型期不规范的市场经济条件下,“经济人”的工具理性也会刺激公共场域大量失信行为的发生;公共场域中的诚信重构,首先需要法律制度的援助;其次,从长远眼光来看,仍需要对传统伦理中“特殊主义”的诚信观进行“创造性的转换”,建构公共场域所需要的“普遍主义”的诚信伦理。     

有别于“心本体”的“意本体”——对作为宋明新儒学归宿的刘蕺山哲学的重新定位

蕺山学与其说如牟宗三所认为的那样,仅为阳明心学的补充和完善,不如说以其以"意"易"心",代表了一种迥异于"心本体"的全新的"意本体"的哲学在宋明新儒学中的崛起和形成。而"意"的合内外、一天人的性质又决定了,一种真正的"意本主义"实际上也即一种"身本主义"。这种身本主义不仅使蕺山的本体论与工夫论彻底地打并归一,而且使其学说最终实现了从宋明新儒学哲学的"意识知觉"范式向中国传统哲学的"身体行为"范式的理论皈依。也正是在这里,为我们豁显出了牟宗三中国哲学解读中的那种流于"康德主义"的理论误区,并使"超越牟宗三"成为今日中国哲学思想之真正光大弘扬的必然的趋势。     

庄子“无用之用”与经济学“效用”概念辨析及其对城乡统筹问题的反思

本文通过对庄子的“无用之用”与经济学“效用”概念的辨析,得出庄子的“无用之用”是尊重大自然的“大用观”,而经济学的“效用观”则趋于人类中心主义的“小用观”的判断,并将此判断运用于当今城乡统筹问题的反思,深入分析了被效用思想指导的城乡统筹中出现的诸多问题,并创新性地提出在城乡统筹的问题上如何控制“效用”之小用,发挥“无用”之大用。     

“相信”、“相信为真”与极小主义的困难CSSCI

本文试图从规范性问题出发,延续赖特、林奇等学者对极小主义的批评。在本文看来,“真”这一谓词具有规范性的含义,我们的信念常常以“真”作为自身的目标。然而以“真”作为信念的目标需要我们能够区分出“相信”与“相信为真”两种信念状态,但极小主义目前却还无法为这种区分提供一个可靠的说明。在这一意义上,极小主义并未提供一个优于传统符合论的真理论方案,其核心的理论主张也需要进一步的澄清。     

检视发展主义话语下的"三农"问题研究

近年来 ,“三农”(农业、农村、农民 )问题变得日益突出 ,“三农”问题的学术研究十分活跃 ,现代性发展主义话语几乎是诸多研究惟一援引的思想资源 ,其核心内容是单线发展观 ,但这一话语已引起人们深深的质疑。通过对支配“三农”问题研究的现代性发展主义话语的批判与反思。摒弃单线的发展主义立场 ,立足于文化人类学的视角 ,可能会有助于我们形成对“三农”问题的另一种理解 ,并为“三农”问题的最终解决提供必要的思想语境     

基督教伦理理论的两种类型

在西方基督徒中间,对与性、家庭生活和医学伦理问题相联系的个体道德问题,存在着严重的分歧.因为在今天的基督徒中间存在着两种伦理理论决定着他们的观点,第一种道德判断是"道义论",另一种道德判断叫做"后果主义".     

“曲成万物而不遗”——先秦儒家、道家哲学的原初“物”论论域

先秦儒家、道家哲学依“存在实现论”的个性特质,孕育出一种不同于西方哲学知识论意义上的原初“物”论论域。此论域可用《周易·系辞上》“曲成万物而不遗”一语来标示。它揭示出万物的成就与实现方式乃是在天人相通、互为中介的关联中达成的。此一原初“物”论论域规定了,“物”在本原上并不是外于人的现成对象,而是经由人之修为工夫所转出的整体性的境域显象。儒家、道家哲学中的为学工夫论与境界论由此被收摄其中。在修为工夫方面,儒家、道家两家工夫的具体进路虽有所不同,但最终都落实为“复”“反”“归”“止”的“曲成”工夫。循此修为工夫,“曲成万物”最终指向一个“人”“物”各成其所是而又“独”立超越的“道”境：一方面它是“人”之“道”,是经由“人”“物”相接的修为工夫所转出的人格气象境界;另一方面它又是“物”之“道”,是“物”自身的本真成就与开显。先秦儒家、道家哲学“合外内”“一天人”的精神特质在此独立超越的道境中得以实现。     

Welfare and Self-Governance

Two ideas have dominated ethical thought since the time of Bentham and Kant. One is utilitarianism, the other is an idea of moral agency as self-governance. Utilitarianism says that morality must somehow subserve welfare, self-governance says that it must be graspable directly by individual moral insight. But these ideas seem to war with one another. Can we eliminate the apparent conflict by a careful review of what is plausible in the two ideas? In seeking an answer to this question I examine (1) the implications of welfarism, (2) the nature of moral obligation (3) the nature of our moral knowledge.     

Beyond physical harm: how preference for consequentialism and primary psychopathy relate to decisions on a monetary trolley dilemma

When is it appropriate to harm a single person to help multiple others? Psychologists have investigated this question through the study of hypothetical “trolley” dilemmas involving extreme physical harm life-or-death situations that contrast outcome-focussed, consequentialist moral reasoning with principle-focussed, deontological moral reasoning. The present studies investigate whether participants’ preference for consequentialism generalises across domains. We administered traditional physical harm dilemmas as well as a trolley-type dilemma involving monetary harm. Across four studies (N?=?809), an internal meta-analysis demonstrated that participants’ responses to the traditional dilemmas predicted their responses to the monetary dilemma. Additionally, previous research has uncovered that primary psychopathy predicts consequentialist responses on physical harm dilemmas. The current work uncovers that this association does not generalise to monetary harm dilemmas, suggesting that the association between primary psychopathy and consequentialist reasoning is not related to consequentialist reasoning per se, but to the idiosyncrasies of traditional harm-centric trolley dilemmas instead.     

Level and Inequality of Happiness in Nations: Does Greater Happiness of a Greater Number Imply Greater Inequality in Happiness?

Utilitarians and egalitarians have different priorities. Utilitarians prioritize the greatest level of happiness in society and are prepared to accept inequality, while egalitarians prioritize the smallest differences and are willing to accept a loss of happiness for this purpose. In theory these moral tenets conflict, but do they really clash in practice? This question is answered in two steps. First I consider the relation between level and inequality of happiness in nations; level of happiness is measured using average responses to a survey question on life satisfaction and inequality is measured with the standard deviation. There appears to be a strong negative correlation; in nations where average happiness is high, the standard deviation tends to be low. This indicates harmony instead of tension. Secondly I consider the institutional factors that are likely to affect happiness. It appears that level and equality of happiness depend largely on the same institutional context, which is another indication for harmony. We may conclude that the discussion between utilitarians and egalitarians is of little practical importance. This conclusion implies that increasing income inequality can go together with decreasing inequality in happiness and this conclusion provides moral support for Governments developing modern market economics     

How should utilitarians think about the future?

Abstract

Utilitarians must think collectively about the future because many contemporary moral issues require collective responses to avoid possible future harms. But current rule utilitarianism does not accommodate the distant future. Drawing on my recent books Future People and Ethics for a Broken World, I defend a new utilitarianism whose central ethical question is: What moral code should we teach the next generation? This new theory honours utilitarianism’s past and provides the flexibility to adapt to the full range of credible futures – from futures broken by climate change to the digital, virtual and predictable futures produced by various possible technologies.     

Inside baseball and ethics consultation: a comment on "ethics been very good to us"

In response to the article by Scofield, I consider the that, how, and why of ethics consultation, moral expertise, and the rules of the game. The question still to be engaged is, how does all of this work out for patients and families?     

社会距离知觉对道德判断的影响研究

理论上,人们对不同个体行为是否违背道德的判断是完全一致的。本研究提出,人们对社会距离线索的知觉会影响对道德行为的判断。研究设计了两个实验,分别从社会距离直接启动和社会距离线索启动的角度对这一假设进行了检验。结果发现,较近的社会距离启动及社会距离线索都能促使个体采取更温和的道德判断,功利主义的色彩比较浓厚,而较远的社会距离启动促使个体采用更加严格的道德判断,表现出道义论倾向。文章最后讨论了这一结果对未来研究的意义。     

Ethics and Intuitions

For millennia, philosophers have speculated about the origins of ethics. Recent research in evolutionary psychology and the neurosciences has shed light on that question. But this research also has normative significance. A standard way of arguing against a normative ethical theory is to show that in some circumstances the theory leads to judgments that are contrary to our common moral intuitions. If, however, these moral intuitions are the biological residue of our evolutionary history, it is not clear why we should regard them as having any normative force. Research in the neurosciences should therefore lead us to reconsider the role of intuitions in normative ethics.     

Effects of Dark Tetrad traits on utilitarian moral judgement: The role of personal involvement and familiarity with the victim

The aim of this study was to re‐examine relations between dark traits and utilitarian moral judgement in sacrificial moral dilemmas by taking into account two contextual characteristics of dilemmas: the actor’s role in sacrificing (personal or impersonal involvement in inflicting harm) and the actor’s familiarity with the victim (a known or an unknown person). Results showed that all dark traits, except for psychopathy, obtained significant main and positive effects on utilitarian moral judgement. However, psychopathy and sadism obtained interaction effects with dilemma type, indicating the importance of the specific context of moral judgement in individuals with these traits. Furthermore, among all dark traits, only sadism showed an incremental contribution to utilitarian judgement over empathy and HEXACO traits, with the highest contribution to dilemmas that include personal harm. Results highlighted the role of enjoyment of cruelty in utilitarian moral judgement.     

Moral Utilitarianism and Attitudes Toward Animals

The majority of studies investigating attitudes toward animals have underscored the role of demographic and personality factors. The study of the role of general moral worldviews on attitudes toward animals represents an important complementary perspective. In the current study, we analyzed the relationship between moral utilitarianism toward humans and attitudes toward animals. In psychological and neuroscientific studies, moral utilitarianism has been shown to be related to empathy deficits. We expected that utilitarian decision making would be related to the endorsement of an instrumental representation of animals. We measured utilitarianism with the trolley problem, a hypothetical moral dilemma widely used in the psychological study of moral reasoning. A sample of 20,474 French adults answered an online survey measuring attitudes toward animals and moral decision making involving human beings. Results showed that irrespective of participants’ age and gender, there was a slight relationship between utilitarianism measured by the trolley dilemma and the endorsement of an instrumental representation of animal. Limitations and implications for future research are considered.