Amazon cover image
Image from Amazon.com
Image from Google Jackets

What We Ought and What We Can / Alex King.

By: Material type: TextTextLanguage: English Publication details: London : Routledge, 2019.Description: ix, 110 p. : 23 cmISBN:
  • 9780815366096
Subject(s): DDC classification:
  • 23 170 KIN
Contents:
Contents
1. The Principle
2. The Objections
3. Must Morality Be Fair?
4. Toward a Better Explanation
5. Implications and Applications
6. Conclusion
Bibliography
Index
Summary: "Are we able to do everything we ought to do? According to the important but controversial Ought Implies Can principle, the answer is yes. In this book Alex King sheds some much-needed light on this principle. She argues that it is flawed because we are obligated to perform some actions that we cannot perform, and goes on to present a suggested theory for anyone who would deny the principle. She examines the traditional motivations for Ought Implies Can, and finds that they to a large degree do not support it. Using examples like gay rights, addiction, and disability, she argues that we can preserve many of the motivations that led us to the principle by thinking more about what we, as individuals or institutions, can fairly demand of ourselves and each other. Alex King is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University at Buffalo, SUNY, USA"-- Provided by publisher
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
Holdings
Item type Current library Collection Call number Status Date due Barcode
General Books General Books CUTN Central Library Social Sciences Non-fiction 170 KIN (Browse shelf(Opens below)) Available 48513

Contents

1. The Principle

2. The Objections

3. Must Morality Be Fair?

4. Toward a Better Explanation

5. Implications and Applications

6. Conclusion

Bibliography

Index

"Are we able to do everything we ought to do? According to the important but controversial Ought Implies Can principle, the answer is yes. In this book Alex King sheds some much-needed light on this principle. She argues that it is flawed because we are obligated to perform some actions that we cannot perform, and goes on to present a suggested theory for anyone who would deny the principle. She examines the traditional motivations for Ought Implies Can, and finds that they to a large degree do not support it. Using examples like gay rights, addiction, and disability, she argues that we can preserve many of the motivations that led us to the principle by thinking more about what we, as individuals or institutions, can fairly demand of ourselves and each other. Alex King is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University at Buffalo, SUNY, USA"-- Provided by publisher

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.

Powered by Koha