Source: https://content.sciendo.com/abstract/journals/ebce/7/1-2/article-p57.xml?rskey=o5310W&amp;result=6
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 08:07:00+00:00

Document:
G. E. Moore’s critical analysis of right action in utilitarian ethics and his consequentialist concept of right action is a starting point for a theory of moral/right action in ethics of social consequences. The terms right and wrong have different meanings in these theories. The author explores different aspects of right and wrong actions in ethics of social consequences and compares them with Moore’s ideas. He positively evaluates Moore’s contributions to the development his theory of moral/right action.
DOMAGAŁA, J. (2015): Vasil Gluchman’s ethics of social consequences and the professional ethics of a Polish Police Officer. In: Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 5(1–2), pp. 115–119.
DUBIEL-ZIELIŃSKA, P. (2013): “Ethics of social consequences” and “Ethics of Development” as Theories belonging to Stream of Ethics of Act. In: Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 3(3–4), pp. 173–188.
DUBIEL-ZIELIŃSKA, P. (2015): Consequentialist and non-consequentialist overtones of the Code of ethics of an academic staff member in light of ethics of social consequences. In: Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 5(1–2), pp. 105–113.
DUBIEL-ZIELIŃSKA, P. (2016): Moral dilemmas in professions of public trust and the assumptions of ethics of social consequences. In: Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 6(1–2), pp. 19–32.
GLUCHMAN, V. (2000): Utilitarizmus G. E. Moora [G. E. Moore’s utilitarianism]. In: G. E. Moore: Etika [Ethics], trans. and ed. by V. Gluchman & M. Gluchmanová. Prešov: LIM, pp. 9–23.
GLUCHMAN, V. (2001): Teória správneho v etike sociálnych dôsledkov [Theory of right in ethics of social consequences]. In: Filosofický časopis, 49(4), pp. 633–654.
GLUCHMAN, V. (2003): Human being and morality in ethics of social consequences. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.
GLUCHMAN, V. (2007): Human dignity and non-utilitarian consequentialist “Ethics of social consequences”. In: H. Tepe & S. Voss (eds.): The proceedings of the twenty-first world congress of philosophy, vol. 1 Ethics. Ankara: Philosophical Society of Turkey, pp. 159–165.
GLUCHMAN, V. (2009): Dignity and human dignity as methodological basis of bioethics. In: V. Gluchman (ed.): Bioethics in Central Europe: Methodology and Education. Prešov: FF PU, pp. 73–86.
GLUCHMAN, V. (2012): Ethics of social consequences – methodology of bioethics education. In: Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 2(1–2), pp. 16–27.
GLUCHMAN, V. (2016): Disaster issues in non-utilitarian consequentialism. In: Human Affairs, 26(1), pp. 52–62.
GLUCHMAN, V. (2017): Nature of dignity and human dignity. In: Human Affairs, 27(2), pp. 131–144.
GLUCHMANOVÁ, M. (2013): The Teacher as a Moral Agent: Humanity and Human Dignity in the Teaching Profession. In: V. Gluchman (ed.): Morality: Reasoning on Different Approaches. Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi, pp. 141–160.
GRZYBEK, G. (2011): Etika sociálnych dôsledkov a etika vývoja [Ethics of social consequences and development ethics]. In: V. Gluchman et al.: Hodnoty v etike sociálnych dôsledkov [Values in ethics of social consequences]. Prešov: Grafotlač, pp. 186–190.
JACKSON, F. (1991): Decision-Theoretic Consequentialism and the Nearest and Dearest Objection. In: Ethics, 101(3), pp. 461–482.
JEMELKA, P. (2017): Ethics of social consequences and its bioethical aspects as reflected in potential criticism. In: V. Gluchman (ed.): 16th International Conference on “Ethical Thinking – Past & Present” (ETPP 2016/16). Prešov: FF PU, pp. 109–119.
KALAJTZIDIS, J. (2011): Problematika mravných subjektov v etike sociálnych dôsledkov [Moral agents’ issues in ethics of social consequences]. In: V. Gluchman et al.: Hodnoty v etike sociálnych dôsledkov [Values in ethics of social consequences]. Prešov: Grafotlač, pp. 86–121.
KALAJTZIDIS, J. (2012): Etika sociálnych dôsledkov a hospodárska etika (so zameraním na finančný sektor) [Ethics of social consequences and business ethics]. Brno: Tribun EU.
KIŠŠ, I. (2011): Zápas o morálne hodnoty vo filozofickej etike Vasila Gluchmana [Struggle for moral values in Vasil Gluchman’s philosophical ethics]. In: V. Gluchman et al.: Hodnoty v etike sociálnych dôsledkov [Values in ethics of social consequences]. Prešov: Grafotlač, pp. 9–23.
KOMENSKÁ, K. (2016): Bioetické reflexie pohrôm a katastrof – nové výzvy pre súčasnú etiku [Bioethical reflection of disasters and catastrophes – new challenges for contemporary ethics]. In: Filosofický časopis, 64(5), pp. 773–782.
KUŘE, J. (2011): Subjektivní a objektivní moment v etice sociálních důsledků [Subjective and objective aspect in ethics of social consequences]. In: V. Gluchman et al.: Hodnoty v etike sociálnych dôsledkov [Values in ethics of social consequences]. Prešov: Grafotlač, pp. 24–36.
MISSERI, L. (2014): Gluchman y su ética socio-consecuencialista. In: V. Gluchman: Dignidad y consecuencias: ensayos de una ética socio-consecuencialista, 1a ed. Mar del Plata: Kazak Ediciones, pp. 5–17.
MOORE G. E. (2000): Principia Ethica, ed. by T. Baldwin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MOORE, G. E. (2005): Ethics, ed. by W. H. Shaw. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
MÜNZ, T. (2002): Etika sociálnych dôsledkov Vasila Gluchmana [Vasil Gluchman’s ethics of social consequences]. In: Filozofia, 52(2), pp. 276–283.
NAVRÁTILOVÁ, D. (2011): Limity etiky sociálnych dôsledkov v kontexte súčasného etického myslenia [Limits of ethics of social consequences in context of contemporary ethical thinking]. In: V. Gluchman et al.: Hodnoty v etike sociálnych dôsledkov [Values in ethics of social consequences]. Prešov: Grafotlač, pp. 37–45.
PETTIT, P. (1988): The Consequentialist Can Recognise Rights. In: The Philosophical Quarterly, 38(150), pp. 42–55.
PETTIT, P. (1989): Consequentialism and Respect for Persons. In: Ethics, 100(1), pp. 116–126.
PETTIT, P. (1991): Consequentialism. In: P. Singer (ed.): A Companion to Ethics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 230–240.
PETTIT, P. (1994): Consequentialism and Moral Psychology. In: International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 2(1), pp. 1–17.
PETTIT, P. (1997): The Consequentialist Perspective. In: M. Baron, P. Pettit & M. Slote: Three Methods of Ethics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 92–174.
PERSSON, I. (2008): A Consequentialist Distinction between What We Ought to Do and Ought to Try. In: Utilitas, 20(3), pp. 348–355.
SACHDEV, K. N. (2015): Normative analysis of human dignity among professionals. In: Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 5(3–4), pp. 205–210.
SEN, A. (1982): Rights and Agency. In: Philosophy & Public Affairs, 11(1), pp. 3–39.
SEN, A. (1983): Evaluator Relativity and Consequential Evaluation. In: Philosophy & Public Affairs, 12(2), pp. 113–132.
SEN, A. (1993): Utilitarianism and Welfarism. In: P. Pettit (ed.): Consequentialism. Aldershot & Brookfield: Dartmount, pp. 15–41.
SIMUT, C. C. (2011): Essentials of Catholic Radicalism: An Introduction to the Lay Theology of Vito Mancuso. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
SIMUT, C. C. (2016): Staying young today: Vito Mancuso’s Hegelian theology through the lens of Vasil Gluchman’s ethics of social consequences. In: Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 6(1–2), pp. 5–17.
SLOTE, M. (1985): Common-Sense Morality and Consequentialism. London & Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
SLOTE, M. (1989): Beyond Optimizing: A Study of Rational Choice. Cambridge, MA & London: Harvard University Press.
SLOTE, M. (1993): Satisficing Consequentialism. In: P. Pettit (ed.): Consequentialism. Aldershot & Brookfield: Dartmount, pp. 351–375.
ŠVAŇA, L. (2015): War, terrorism, justice and ethics of social consequences. In: Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 5(3–4), pp. 211–225.
ŠVAŇA, L. (2016): On two modern hybrid forms of consequentialism. In: Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 6, (3–4), pp. 157–166.
ZIMMERMAN, M. J. (2006): Is Moral Obligation Objective or Subjective? In: Utilitas, 18(4), pp. 329–361.

References: V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V.