Not exact matches
We argue that Nietzsche is embracing an ancient rather than a modern view
of ethics, what has been called an «ethics
of virtue» rather than an ethics
of rules and
principles, rather than an ethic that looks mainly to the spread
of well - being and happiness («
utilitarianism»).
The usual formulations
of utilitarianism assume an individualism that in
principle works against the common good.
He adds that Hartshorne's understanding
of justice, like that
of utilitarianism, is derived from the
principle of utility (MH 31).
Moskop thus makes at least three important claims in his brief essay: I) that the five theses adequately and unambiguously represent the framework
of Hartshorne's moral philosophy, 2) that Hartshorne's metaphysics justifies not only a broad understanding
of altruism but rather a dependence upon an understanding
of the
principle of utility quite similar to that
of utilitarianism, and 3) that in both Hartshorne's moral philosophy and his metaphysics the claims
of justice are necessarily subordinate to those
of utility.
I suspect that the force
of the egoist's objection to his «proof»
of utility did not strike Mill because
of his previous arguments in
Utilitarianism regarding the ultimate sanction
of the
principle of utility.