Where did utilitarianism come from?

Perry, John F.

doi:10.1017/cbo9781107279629.003

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For a brief overview, see Lisa as Perry rightly claims, 'originally a Christian endeavour'. 6 And while consequentialists today are rarely Christians and Christians today are rarely consequentialists, the distance between the two is not as great as some imagine. John Stuart Mill famously wrote: 'In the golden rule of Jesus of Nazareth, we read the complete spirit of the ethics of utility.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teleology and Consequentialism in Christian Ethics: Goods, Ends, Outcomes

Darr

2023

Studies in Christian Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In his widely read book, Five Types of Ethical Theory (1930), C.D. Broad introduced the distinction between two approaches to ethics: teleology and deontology. In the second half of the twentieth century, these terms found their way into Christian ethics, giving rise to a problem. Christian ethics seems to be straightforwardly teleological, but it also seems to be straightforwardly deontological. In this article, I argue that the problem is largely a product of the way teleology is construed: the ends in teleological ethics are implicitly assumed to be outcomes or states of affairs. I demonstrate the point through a reading of both the early philosophical sources and the more recent works of Charles Camosy and John Perry. I then argue that major sources in the Christian tradition, including those used by Camosy and Perry, are better understood as offering a more expansive picture of teleology in which ends are not always outcomes or states of affairs. I conclude by arguing that this more expansive picture of teleology resolves some important problems that have plagued debates about teleology and deontology in Christian ethics.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%