Virtue, Repugnance, and Deontology

Abstract

We think the Parfit puzzles regarding the repugnant conclusion and the nonidentity problem are problems for act-centered theories in general, not quite solved merely by switching to deontological action guides (let alone by switching to rule consequentialist action guides). We also think Tom’s Hill’s virtue ethics is the best response to Parfit’s puzzles. We will close by asking whether it makes sense to suppose that such a famed Kantian as Hill really is a virtue theorist. We will conjecture, and ask Hill to confirm or deny, that he sees the Kantian standard of universalizability as more a matter of assessing character (what kind of person would act in a way that could not be universalized?) than as a matter of assessing conduct or maxims per se.