Content area
Full Text
J Value Inquiry (2011) 45:215227
DOI 10.1007/s10790-011-9279-8
Stephen Buckle
Published online: 16 July 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
In Practical Ethics, Peter Singer argues that utilitarianism is a rst step that we must take, if we are to think morally and that moving away from utilitarianism requires justication. 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.1 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 signicance, he rejects the assumption.
1 Singers Argument in Outline
Singers argument for utilitarianism is brief. He begins with the claim that to live ethically is to live according to standards of some kind. The standards need not be judged right by others but must be judged right by the individual holding them. People live according to ethical standards, if they can give reasons for their chosen ways of living. As Singer puts it: The notion of living according to ethical standards is tied up with the notion of defending the way one is living, of giving a reason for it, of justifying it.2 To live ethically is to live according to standards we
1 See Peter Singer, Practical Ethics, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1993),p. 14.
2 Ibid., p. 10.
S. Buckle (&)
Australian Catholic University, Barkers Road, Stratheld, NSW 2135, Australia e-mail: [email protected]
Assessing Peter Singers Argument for Utilitarianism: Drawing a Lesson from Rousseau and Kant
123
216 S. Buckle
can defend, whether or not others share the standards. Living ethically, then, is best contrasted not with living badly, but with living according to no standards at all.
Singer adds an additional requirement. He claims that some kinds of reason-giving do not add up to living according to ethical standards. He says: a justication in terms of...