Content area
Abstract
In Practical Ethics, Peter Singer argues that utilitarianism is a first step that we must take, if we are to think morally and that moving away from utilitarianism requires justification. This is a strong claim. In effect, it is to claim that utilitarianism is the default setting for moral thinking and that the onus of proof falls on anyone who resists utilitarianism. The argument has a starting-point in self-interest and is awed for that reason. This aw is comparable to a problem in the argument Rousseau advances for a social contract. Kant offers a solution to the problem that shows the kind of adjustment needed to improve Singers argument. The problem Singer faces stems from an assumption of self-interest typical of evolutionary naturalism, even though when he turns to consider evolutionary theory and its significance, he rejects the assumption.