Charles Goodman
\nBinghamton University<\/p>\n
Several Indian Mah\u0101y\u0101na texts express an ethical perspective that has many features in common with Western forms of universalist consequentialism. \u015a\u0101ntideva, in particular, endorses a strong version of agent-neutrality, claims that compassionate agents should violate Buddhist moral commitments when doing so would produce good results, praises radical altruism, uses a critique of the self to support his ethical views, and even offers a reasonably clear general formulation of what we call act-consequentialism. Meanwhile, Asa\u1e45ga\u2019s discussions of the motivation behind rules of moral discipline and the permissible reasons for breaking those rules suggests an interesting and complex version of rule-consequentialism. Evidence for features of consequentialism can be found in several Mah\u0101y\u0101na s\u016btras as well. In reading these sources, interpretations that draw on virtue ethics may not be as helpful as those that understand the texts as committed to various versions of consequentialism.<\/p>\n
Read article<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" ISSN 1076-9005 Volume 20, 2013 Consequentialism, Agent-Neutrality, and Mah\u0101y\u0101na Ethics Charles Goodman Binghamton University Several Indian Mah\u0101y\u0101na texts express an ethical perspective that has many features in common with Western forms of universalist consequentialism. \u015a\u0101ntideva, in particular, endorses a strong version of agent-neutrality, claims that compassionate agents should violate Buddhist moral commitments when doing so … Continue reading Consequentialism, Agent-Neutrality, and Mah\u0101y\u0101na Ethics<\/span>