CLIMB EVERY MOUNTAIN?
Version of Record online: 21 JAN 2009
© 2009 The Author. Journal compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Volume 22, Issue 1, pages 59–77, March 2009
How to Cite
Ridge, M. (2009), CLIMB EVERY MOUNTAIN?. Ratio, 22: 59–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9329.2008.00418.x
- Issue online: 21 JAN 2009
- Version of Record online: 21 JAN 2009
The central thesis of Derek Parfit's On What Matters is that three of the most important secular moral traditions – Kantianism, contractualism, and consequentialism – all actually converge in a way onto the same view. It is in this sense that he suggests that we may all be ‘climbing the same mountain, but from different sides’. In this paper, I argue that Parfit's argument that we are all metaphorically climbing the same mountain is unsound. One reason his argument does not work is that he has misunderstood the way in which a plausible rule-consequentialism should understand the supervenience of rightness on all possible acceptance levels of the ideal moral code. In place of Parfit's own understanding of this, I develop a view I call ‘variable-rate rule-utilitarianism’, which I argue shares the key insight of Parfit's view but avoids a fatal objection to his own articulation of that insight. Finally, I explore how this modification might allow us to still make a case that we are all ‘climbing the same mountain’, albeit in a very different way and for very different reasons than the ones Parfit had in mind.