more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
The idea of the goodness of total states of affairs played no part in Aristotle's moral philosophy, and in modern times plays not part either in Rawls's account of justice or in the theories of more thoroughgoing contractualists such as Scanlon.
Gist of Idea
The idea of a good state of affairs has no role in the thought of Aristotle, Rawls or Scanlon
Source
Philippa Foot (Utilitarianism and the Virtues [1985], p.76)
Book Ref
Foot,Philippa: 'Moral Dilemmas' [OUP 2002], p.76
A Reaction
We can add Kant to that. But if the supremely good state of affairs were permanently achieved, would that make morality irrelevant? A community of the exceptionally virtuous would not need the veil of ignorance, or contracts.
| 22458 | Consequentialists can hurt the innocent in order to prevent further wickedness [Foot] |
| 22459 | For consequentialism, it is irrational to follow a rule which in this instance ends badly [Foot] |
| 22460 | Why might we think that a state of affairs can be morally good or bad? [Foot] |
| 22461 | Good outcomes are not external guides to morality, but a part of virtuous actions [Foot] |
| 22462 | We should speak the truth, but also preserve and pursue it [Foot] |
| 22463 | Morality is seen as tacit legislation by the community [Foot] |
| 22464 | The idea of a good state of affairs has no role in the thought of Aristotle, Rawls or Scanlon [Foot] |