“对的”与“好的”

伦理学研究 ›› 2003 (1): 84-94.

“对的”与“好的”

(中国台湾)盛庆王来

台湾淡江大学,中国台湾台北

出版日期:2003-01-10 发布日期:2022-02-23
作者简介:盛庆王来(1919-),男,浙江嘉兴人,英国爱丁堡大学电机工程哲学博士。曾任台湾大学、加拿大渥太华大学、温莎大学等校教授,台湾新竹交通大学校长,淡江大学讲座教授。现为淡江大学荣誉教授。

“Right” and “Good”

SHENG Qinglai

Danjiang University, Taibei Taiwan China

Online:2003-01-10 Published:2022-02-23

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 什么是“对的”,和对它的证立,是道德哲学中具有争议性的核心问题,也是效用主义和道义论间的主要差异之所在。统合效用主义对于“好的就是对的”这个陈述有一套完整周延的说法。而道义论对这个问题的证立不够周延或没有足够的说服力。

关键词: “对”, “好”, 效用主义, 道义论, 统合效用主义

Abstract: The question about what is right and justification concerned form a central but controversial issue in moral philosophy. The existence of the question has also reflected the main difference between utilitarianism and virtue ethics. This paper is intended for an objective analysis of the two important moral terms from another point of view.

Key words: Right, Good, utilitarianism , virtue ethics, comprehensive utilitarianism

中图分类号:

B82-052

(中国台湾)盛庆王来. “对的”与“好的”[J]. 伦理学研究, 2003(1): 84-94.

SHENG Qinglai. “Right” and “Good”[J]. Studies in Ethics, 2003(1): 84-94.

参考文献

[1]John Rawls,A Theory of Justice.(Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press,1971).
[2]C.L.Sheng,A New Approach to Utilitarianism:A unified Utilitarian Theory andIts Application to Distributive Justice. (Dordrecht,The Netherlands:Kluwer Academic Publishers,1991).
[3]John Stuart Mill,“Utilitarianism,Chaper IV”,In Mill:Utilitarianism,ed.Samuel Gorovity(Indianapolis,Indiana:The Bobbs-Merril Company,1971).
[4]C.L.Sheng,“The Is/ Ought Gap,Naturalism,and Utilitarianism(in Chinese),”to be published in Journa of South China Normal University(June 2002).
[5]Michael Sandel,Liberalism and the Limits of Jastice(Cambridge,England:Cambridge University Press,1982).
[6]H.A.Prichard,“Does Morality Rest on a Mistake?”in Moral Obligations:Essays and Lectures(Oxford:Clarondon Press,1949).
[7]Harry Bingswanger,“Life-based Teleolgy and The Foundation of Ethics,”TheMonist,Vol.75,No.1(Jannary 1992).
[8]John Rawls,“Two Concepts of Rules,”The Philosophical Review,Vol.64(195).
[9]W.D.Ross,The Right and The Good.(Oxford:Oxford University Press,1930).
[10]Gerald F.Gaus,“What Is Deontology?Part One :Orthodox Views,”The Journalof Value Inquiry,Vol.35,No.(2001).
[11]C.L.Sheng,A Uitilitarian General Theory of Value(Amsterdam and Atlanta:Rodopi International Publisher,1998).Originally I used the term “pseudo-objective”.in that book,but later,according to the advice of Professor Chao-Tien Lin,I changed it to quasi-objective,which is more appropriate.
[12]David Gauthier,Morals by Agreement (Oxford:Oxford University Press,1988).
[13]Samuel Freeman,“Utilitarianism,Deontology and the Priority of Right,”Philosophy and Public Affairs,Vol.23(Fall 1994).
[14]Hastings Rashdall,The Theory of Good and Evil,Vol.I(Oxford:Oxford University Press,1907).
[15]Thomas Scanlon,“Rights,Goals,and Fairness,”in Start Hampshire,ed.Publicand Private Morality(Cambridge,England:Cambridge University Press,1978).
[16]Nancy Davis,“Contemporary Deontology,”in Peter Singer,ed.A Company to Ethics(Oxford:Blackwell,1991).
[17]Charles Fried,Right and Wrong.(Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press,1978).
[18]Alan Donagan,The Theory of Morality(Chicago:University of Chicago press,1977).
[19]Robert Olson,“Deontological Ethics,”in Paul Edwards,ed,The Encyclopediaof Philosophy(London:Macmillam,1967).
[20]Kurt Baier,“The Point of View of Morality,”Australasian Journal of Philosophy.Vol.32(1954),P.117.
[21]Bernard Gert,Morality:A New Justification of the Moral Rules(Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press,1988).
[22]C.L.Sheng,“One the Nature of Moral Principles,”The Journal of Value Inquiry,Vol.28,No.4(December 1994).
[23]David Lyons,Forms and Limits of Utilitarianism Oxford:Oxford University Press,1965.
[24]Stanley I.Benn,A Theory of Freedom(Cambridge,England:Cambridge UniversityPress,1988).
[25]C.L.Sheng,“On the Flexible Nature of Morality,”Philosophy Research Archives,Vol.12(1986-87).
[26]Brad Hooker,“Ross-Style Pluralism versus Rule-Utilitarianism,”Mind,vol.105,No.420(October 1996).
[27]Lincoln Allison,“Utilitarianism:What Is It and Why Should It Respond?”inLincoln Allison,ed.The Utilitarian Response:The Contemporary Viability of Utilitarian Political Philosophy(London:Sage Publications,1990).