Ethical theorising has largely centred on the right and the good and the relation between the two. Consequentialists predominantly understand rightness as a matter of maximising the good, and accordingly focus on understanding which things are good; deontologists tend to see acting rightly as a matter of acting in accordance with a number of rules or principles. Some consequentialists emphasize the role of rules in ethical life and some deontologists put great weight on our obligation to do good, but generally writers in the consequentialist tradition have discussed mereological issues concerning how good wholes are made good by their parts, while deontologists argue about the way in which aspects of situations interact to constitute what we ought to do on the whole.
1 Dancy, J., (2004), Ethics without Principles, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2 Hooker, B.; Little, M. (eds.), (2000), Moral Particularism, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3 Hurka, T., (1998), “Two Kinds of Organic Unity”, The Journal of Ethics 2: 299-320.
4 Lemos, N. M., (1994), Intrinsic Value: Concept and Warrant, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5 Moore, G. E., (1903), Principia Ethica, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6 McDowell, J., (1979), “Virtue and Reason”, The Monist 62: 331-350.
7 McKeever, S.; Ridge, M., (2006), Principled Ethics: Generalism as a Regulative Ideal, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8 Ross, W. D., (1930), The Right and the Good, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
9 Rønnow-Rasmussen, T.; Zimmerman, M. J. (eds.), (2005), Recent Work on Intrinsic Value, Dordrecht: Springer.