Abstract
AbstractMost philosophers think that phenomenal consciousness underlies, or at any rate makes a large contribution, to moral considerability. This paper argues that many such accounts invoke question-begging arguments. Moreover, they’re unable to explain apparent differences in moral status across and within different species. In the light of these problems, I argue that we ought to take very seriously a view according to which moral considerability is grounded in functional properties. Phenomenal consciousness may be sufficient for having a moral value, but it may not be necessary, and it may contribute relatively little to our overall considerability.
Funder
HORIZON EUROPE European Innovation Council
UK Research and Innovation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference34 articles.
1. Block, N. 1995. Consciousness. In A Companion to the Philosophy of Mind, ed. S. Guttenplan, 210–219. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
2. Block, N. 1995. On a confusion about a function of consciousness. Behavioral and brain sciences 18: 227–247.
3. Boonin, D. 2019. Dead Wrong: The Ethics of Posthumous Harm. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
4. Bradford, G. 2023. Consciousness and Welfare Subjectivity. Noûs 57: 905–921. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12434.
5. Breen, N., M. Coltheart, and D. Caine. 2001. A two-way window on face recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5: 234–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01659-4.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Counting subjects;Inquiry;2024-07-02