Attila Tanyi

junior fellow
EURIAS cohort 2016/2017
discipline Philosophy
Lecturer in Philosophy, University of Liverpool

Research project

Consequentialism and Its Demands: The Role of Institutions

 

Proponents of act-consequentialism hold that the right course of action is the one that produces the best results as judged from an impartial perspective. However, it is often claimed that this requirement is so demanding that it is unacceptable for anyone to follow it. We might call this the Overdemandingness Objection (OD) to consequentialism.

 

The project’s core idea is to direct attention to the ability of institutions to reduce moral demands on individuals. The motivating thought here is that something like a division of labour is justifiable: the demanding moral principles regulate institutions, whereas individuals "only" have the duty to set up and maintain these institutions. However, in order to get off the ground this "institutional approach" has to tackle several challenges.

 

First, Liam Murphy has argued that overdemandingess considerations will not give us what he calls dualism: the Rawlsian idea that different principles apply to institutions and to individuals. And, the thought is, we need dualism to substantiate the present response to OD. In response to this objection, the project argues that one can keep dualism as the answer to OD without going along with the stronger idea that it is OD itself that necessitates our endorsement of dualism.

 

Second, consequentialism appears to be a monist theory in Murphy’s sense: the same principle (of beneficence) applies to individuals as to institutions. Hence the dualist idea that is taken to underlie the present response to OD may not be justifiable in the case of consequentialism, whether or not OD can lead us to dualism. In response to this objection, the project argues that we should introduce a distinction between two kinds of division of labour. The first, a division of moral labour, is indeed one that consequentialism cannot appeal to since the division and the resulting dualism are grounded in a pluralism of values that consequentialism does not endorse. The second, an institutional division of labour, on the other hand, is something consequentialism can endorse.

 

Third, arguably, OD is most persuasive when we appeal to existing global problems. However, it might seem that the institutional approach is in trouble here since the relevant institutions, but not the demands on individuals are missing; hence, dualism cannot be appealed to in response to OD in this case. In response to this objection, the project argues that there are already several institutions that can be used for the purposes of fulfilling consequentialist requirements.

 

Biography

 

Attila Tanyi is Lecturer at the Department of Philosophy of the University of Liverpool. He holds a Ph.D in Political Science from Central European University, Budapest. He specializes in moral and political philosophy, but his work stretches over disciplinary boundaries. His areas of specialization are: meta-ethics (esp. practical reason and rationality), moral psychology (esp. theories of motivation), moral and political philosophy, experimental philosophy, and political philosophy.

 

Selected publications



'Multi-Dimensional Consequentialism and Degrees of Rightness', with V. Andric, Philosophical Studies, vol. 173, no. 3, 2016, pp. 711-731.

 

'On the Intrinsic Value of Genetic Integrity: A Commentary', Ethics, Policy and Environment, vol. 18, no. 3, 2015, pp. 248-251.

 

'Moral Demands and Ethical Theory: The Case of Consequentialism', in B. Dainton & H. Robinson (eds), The Bloomsbury Companion to Analytic Philosophy, Bloomsbury, London, 2015, pp. 500-527. 

 

'Ought We to Forget What We Cannot Forget? A Response to Sybille Schmidt', in G. Galizia & D. Shulman (eds), Forgetting: An Interdisciplinary Conversation, Magnes Press of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 2015, pp. 258-262.

 

'Overdemanding Consequentialism? An Experimental Approach', with M. Bruder, Utilitas, vol. 26, no. 3, 2014, pp. 250-275. 

 

institut

senior fellow
EURIAS promotion 2014/2015
Collegium Helveticum
discipline Sociology
2014
junior fellow
EURIAS promotion 2016/2017
Collegium Helveticum
discipline History
2016
senior fellow
EURIAS promotion 2015/2016
Collegium Helveticum
discipline Art History
2015
junior fellow
EURIAS promotion 2018/2019
Collegium Helveticum
discipline Cultural Studies
2018