Titlebook: Rightness as Fairness; A Moral and Politica Marcus Arvan Book 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016 Morality.prudence.r

本義

書目名稱Rightness as Fairness影響因子(影響力)




書目名稱Rightness as Fairness影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Rightness as Fairness網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度




書目名稱Rightness as Fairness網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Rightness as Fairness被引頻次




書目名稱Rightness as Fairness被引頻次學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Rightness as Fairness年度引用




書目名稱Rightness as Fairness年度引用學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Rightness as Fairness讀者反饋




書目名稱Rightness as Fairness讀者反饋學(xué)科排名

Ancillary

溫室

Efflorescent

Evaluating Rightness as Fairness, I will offer broad rather than detailed comparisons (given space constraints), I believe the arguments I provide in favor of Rightness as Fairness justify serious consideration of the theory in future philosophical work.

侵害

嚴(yán)重傷害

The Problem of Possible Future Selves,Chapter 1 argued that moral philosophy should be based on Firm Foundations — on truths commonly recognized by human observers — and that the following instrumental conception of normative rationality is the firmest such foundation:

暖昧關(guān)系

易達(dá)到

Three Unified Formulations,Chapter 3 argued that instrumental rationality requires responding to the problem of possible future selves by way of the following principle:

從容

The Moral Original Position,Chapter 4 showed that the Categorical-Instrumental Imperative — a principle that I have argued solves the problem of possible future selves — can be restated as follows:

WAG