Because the Self‑interest Theory (S) and Consequentialism (C) are often indirectly self‑defeating an… — Derek Parfit

Because the Self‑interest Theory (S) and Consequentialism (C) are often indirectly self‑defeating and Common‑Sense Morality is often directly collectively self‑defeating, S, C, and Common‑Sense Morality must be revised in ways that reduce their mutual disagreement and point toward a Unified Theory.

By Derek Parfit, from Les raisons et les personnes

Key Arguments

Parfit claims: 'Since they are often indirectly self-defeating, the Self-interest Theory and Consequentialism must make claims about our desires and dispositions. They must claim that we should be disposed to act in ways that they claim to be irrational, and morally wrong.'
He adds: 'Since Common-Sense Morality is often directly collectively self-defeating, it must be revised.'
He notes that these two revisionary moves 'reduce the disagreement between Common-Sense Morality and Consequentialism.'
He takes this convergence to be methodologically and substantively positive: 'This is a welcome result. It points us towards a Unified Theory, that would remove this disagreement.'

Source Quotes

SHOULD WE WELCOME OR REGRET MY CONCLUSIONS? I argue (1) Since they are often indirectly self-defeating, the Self-interest Theory and Consequentialism must make claims about our desires and dispositions. They must claim that we should be disposed to act in ways that they claim to be irrational, and morally wrong.

I argue (1) Since they are often indirectly self-defeating, the Self-interest Theory and Consequentialism must make claims about our desires and dispositions. They must claim that we should be disposed to act in ways that they claim to be irrational, and morally wrong. (2) Since Common-Sense Morality is often directly collectively self-defeating, it must be revised.

They must claim that we should be disposed to act in ways that they claim to be irrational, and morally wrong. (2) Since Common-Sense Morality is often directly collectively self-defeating, it must be revised. As I suggest in Chapter 5, these two conclusions reduce the disagreement between Common-Sense Morality and Consequentialism.

(2) Since Common-Sense Morality is often directly collectively self-defeating, it must be revised. As I suggest in Chapter 5, these two conclusions reduce the disagreement between Common-Sense Morality and Consequentialism. This is a welcome result.

This is a welcome result. It points us towards a Unified Theory, that would remove this disagreement. I argue (3) In considering how our acts affect other people, most of us make serious mistakes.

Key Concepts

Since they are often indirectly self-defeating, the Self-interest Theory and Consequentialism must make claims about our desires and dispositions.
They must claim that we should be disposed to act in ways that they claim to be irrational, and morally wrong.
Since Common-Sense Morality is often directly collectively self-defeating, it must be revised.
these two conclusions reduce the disagreement between Common-Sense Morality and Consequentialism.
It points us towards a Unified Theory, that would remove this disagreement.

Context

Opening of Section 152, where Parfit lists earlier conclusions (1) and (2) about self‑defeatingness and explains why the resulting convergence between Common‑Sense Morality and Consequentialism is something we should welcome.