green numbers give full details.     |    back to list of philosophers     |     unexpand these ideas

Ideas of Roger Crisp, by Text

[British, fl. 1998, Fellow of St Anne's College, Oxford University]

2001 Interview with Baggini and Stangroom
p.31 p.31 Consequentialism wrongly assumes a clear line between an act and its consequences
     Full Idea: What is wrong with consequentialism is that it assumes that there is agreement about when an act ends and when its consequences begin.
     From: Roger Crisp (Interview with Baggini and Stangroom [2001], p.31)
     A reaction: I certainly agree that this is a mistake in consequentialism, which has a crude idea of what an action is, though I am not convinced that this is the key fault in the theory. The theory doesn't distinguish acts by people from those by machines.
p.37 p.37 Does the environment have value in itself?
     Full Idea: The debate which dominates environmental ethics is whether the environment has value in itself.
     From: Roger Crisp (Interview with Baggini and Stangroom [2001], p.37)
     A reaction: I say the answer has to be 'yes'. If it only has value in relation to conscious or human life, it will be difficult to demonstrate that they have value. Pleasure and pain, or wisdom, can't imply value on their own; a bigger picture is needed.