Name: Explaining Right and Wrong: A new Moral Pluralism and its Implications (Routledge Studies in Ethics and Moral Theory) (en Inglés)
Price: 40320.00 CLP
Availability: InStock
Author: Benjamin Sachs
ISBN: 9780367667337

portada Explaining Right and Wrong: A new Moral Pluralism and its Implications (Routledge Studies in Ethics and Moral Theory) (en Inglés)

Formato

Libro Físico

Editorial

Routledge

Autor

Benjamin Sachs

Idioma

Inglés

N° páginas

188

Encuadernación

Tapa Blanda

ISBN13

9780367667337

N° edición

Explaining Right and Wrong: A new Moral Pluralism and its Implications (Routledge Studies in Ethics and Moral Theory) (en Inglés)

Benjamin Sachs (Autor) · Routledge · Tapa Blanda

Libro Nuevo

$ 40.320

$ 80.630

Ahorras: $ 40.310

50% descuento

Envío normal

Origen: Estados Unidos (Costos de importación incluídos en el precio)

Se enviará desde nuestra bodega entre el Martes 23 de Julio y el Martes 06 de Agosto.

Lo recibirás en cualquier lugar de Chile entre 1 y 3 días hábiles luego del envío.

Reseña del libro "Explaining Right and Wrong: A new Moral Pluralism and its Implications (Routledge Studies in Ethics and Moral Theory) (en Inglés)"

Explaining Right and Wrong aims to shake the foundations of contemporary ethics by showing that moral philosophers have been deploying a mistaken methodology in their efforts to figure out the truth about what we morally ought to do. Benjamin Sachs argues that moral theorizing makes sense only if it is conceived of as an explanatory project and carried out accordingly. The book goes on to show that the most prominent forms of moral monism--consequentialism, Kantianism, and contractarianism/contractualism--as well as Rossian pluralism, each face devastating explanatory objections. It offers in place of these flawed options a brand-new family of normative ethical theories, non-Rossian pluralism. It then argues that the best kind of non-Rossian pluralism will be spare; in particular, it will deny that an action can be wrong in virtue of constituting a failure to distribute welfare in a particular way or that an action can be wrong in virtue of constituting a failure to rescue. Furthermore, it also aims to show that a great deal of contemporary writing on the distribution of health care resources in cases of scarcity is targeted at questions that either have no answers at all or none that ordinary moral theorizing can uncover.