學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 亨利．西季威克的《倫理學方法》與實踐理性二元論
Henry Sidgwick`s Methods of Ethics and The Dualism of Practical Reason作者 邱奕凱
Chiu, Yi-Kai貢獻者 陳建綱
Chen, Chien-Kang
邱奕凱
Chiu, Yi-Kai關鍵詞 效益主義
直覺主義
實踐理性二元論
倫理學方法
Utilitarianism
Intuitionalism
Dualism of practical reason
Methods of ethics日期 2019 上傳時間 7-Aug-2019 16:46:41 (UTC+8) 摘要 本論文聚焦於Henry Sidgwick（1838-1900）的倫理學思考，主要討論其著作《倫理學方法》（Methods of Ethics）之相關問題，該書細緻的論證了三種普通人判斷道德責任的方法：自利主義（Egoism）、直覺主義（Intuitionalism）與效益主義(Utilitarianism)，檢視這三種方法如何運作並討論三者的相互關係。關於自利主義與效益主義的統整上，他發現人們對於關乎自身利益與關乎集體利益兩者所做出的道德判斷指向了兩個不同的極端，難以在理論上統合，在實踐上也就有了兩個不同的標準。Sidgwick稱其為「實踐理性二元論（The Dualism of Practical Reason）」的困境，此為本篇論文最核心的問題意識：Sidgwick如何導出此結論？二元論的內涵和意義為何？本文首先從歷史出發，描繪形塑Sidgwick理論的背景，其中包含其個人生長經歷，以及他所承襲的學派。此部份重點在於呈現Sidgwick獨特的「直覺主義式效益主義」，他將幾股對立的思潮，凝聚成為自己特別的理論。接著闡述《倫理學方法》的實質內容，主要關於理性（reason）、應當（ought）及正確（right）等概念的涵義，以及直覺主義——常識道德與效益主義如何連結，並且由此展開關於實踐理性二元論的描述。此問題是Sidgwick對Bentham及Mill的修正，他試圖從理論面而非實踐、應然而非實然導出一個單一的倫理原則，最後產生的失敗。本文最後一部份是關於實踐理性二元論的詮釋，主要的切入點是Sidgwick對常識的重視而透露出的保守主義色彩。此種做法限縮了理性作用的空間，影響了兩種方法的證成。而本文亦發現，自利主義在ME中的證成是不完整的，那麼為何它足以成為對立於效益主義的另一個倫理方法？本文的回答時，Sidgwick此部分的書寫隱含對個人自由的保障，劃分出一塊不可為集體利益吸收的個人自利考量。
This thesis focuses on the ethical thinking and related discussions of Henry Sidgwick’s Method of Ethics (ME). In this book, Sidgwick elucidated and discussed the mutual relations of three kinds of methods that are used in common people’s moral thinking: Egoism, Intuitionalism and Utilitarianism. In terms of the unifying of Egoism and Utilitarianism, Sidgwick discovered that the moral decisions made by common people when they concern about their own interests and about public interest point to two different directions; thereofore, it can not be easily unified as one in theory. Sidgwick called this difficulty as “the Dualism of Practical Reason”. How did he reach this conclusion, and what are the meaning and implication of it? I will start to answer these questions from historical perspective, describing the background of Sidgwick’s early life which has a great influence on his theory and the schools of thought that Sidgwick inherited. The importance of this historical review is to show how Sidgwick created his unique “Intuitional Utilitarianism” by fusing theories which contradict each other. Then I will describe the meaning and related arguments of Reason, Right and Ought in ME as well as how Intutionalism (Common Sense Morality) connects with Utilitarianism. The definition Sidgwick gave to these concepts and the connection between the two methods partly form the Dualism. In addition, the failure of Dualism was a result of his effort to modify Bentham and Mill’s theories by trying to get one ultimate moral criterion from theorical instead of practical point of view. In the final chapter of this thesis, I will elucidate how Sidgwick took Common Sense to justify other two methods and thus restricted the realm of Reason. I regard this as the conservative aspect of Sidgwick’s ME. Besides, I found that the justification of Egoism Sidgwick gave is not complete, which can be a breach leading Egoism to Utilitarianism. However, the conclusion of Dualism of Practical Reason shows that Sidgwick intended to use Egoism to conter Utilitarianism for the purpose of preserving a realm of individual freedom.參考文獻 中文部分亨利・西季威克著，廖申白（譯），1995。《倫理學方法》。台北：淑馨出版社。約翰・斯圖亞特・穆勒著，邱振訓（譯），2017。《效益主義》。新北：暖暖書屋文化。約翰・斯圖亞特・穆勒著，許寶騤（譯），2017。《論自由》。北京：商務印書館。陳江進，2013。《功利主義與實踐理性－西季威克道德哲學思想研究》。北京：人民出版社。曾國祥，2010。《主體危機與理性批判：自由主義的保守詮釋》。台北：巨流出版社。邊沁著，時殷弘（譯），2000。《道德與立法原理導論》。北京：商務印書館。C. D. 布勞德著，田永勝（譯），2002。《五種倫理學理論》。北京：中國社會科學出版社。G.E. 摩爾著，陳德中（譯），1993。《倫理學原理》。北京：商務印書館。陳建綱，2011。〈從同情共感到效益: 論《人性論》與《道德原理探索》的異與 同〉。《政治與社會哲學評論》，第38期，頁1-56。英文部分Bentham, Jeremy. 1962. “The rationale of reward.” In the works of Jeremy Bentham vol. 2, ed. John Bowring. New York: Russell and Russell, pp. 190-274.Bentham, Jeremy. 1970. The Collected Works of Jeremy Bentham: An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, eds. J. H. Burns and H. L. A. Hart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Bentham, Jeremy. 1983. Deontology together with A Table of the Springs of Action and the Article on Utilitarianism, ed. Amnon Goldworth. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Bentham, Jeremy. 1999.The Collected Works of Jeremy Bentham: Legislator of the World: Writings on Codification, Law, and Education, eds. Philip Schofield and Jonathan Harris. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Brink, D.O. 1988. “Sidgwick`s dualism of practical reason.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 66(3): 291-307.Brink, D.O. 1989. Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Brink, D.O. 1992. “Sidgwick and the rationale for rational egoism.” In Essays on Henry Sidgwick, ed. Bart Schultz. Cambridge: Cambridge university press, pp. 199-240.Brink, D.O. 1994. “Common Sense and First Principles in Sidgwick`s Methods.” Social Philosophy and Policy, 11(1): 179-201.Broad, C.D. 1967. Five Types of Ethical Theory. London: Routledge.Collini, Stefan. 2001.“My Roles and their Duties: Sidgwick as Philosopher, Professeor and Public Moralist.” In Henry Sidgwick, ed. Ross Harrison. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 9-50.Crisp, Roger. 1996. “The Dualism of Practical Reason.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, (96): 53-73.Crisp, Roger. 2002.“Sidgwick and the boundaries of intuitionism.” In Ethical Intuitionisms: re-evaulations, ed. Phillip Stratton-Lake. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 56-75.Crisp, Roger. 2011. “Pleasure and Hedonism in Sidgwick.” in Underivative Duty: British Moral Philosophers from Sidgwick to Ewing, ed. Thomas Hurka. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 26-44.Crisp, Roger. 2015. The cosmos of duty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Crisp, Roger., and Hooker, Brad. 2000. Well-being and morality: Essays in honour of James Griffin. Oxford: Clarendon press.Cremaschi, Sergio. 2008. “‘Nothing to invite or to reward a separate examination’: Sidgwick and Whewell.” Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics, 10(2): 137-184.Darwell, Stephen. 2000.“Sidgwick, Concern, and the Good.” Utilitas, 12(3):291 - 306.Deigh, John. 2007. “Sidgwick`s Epistemology.” Utilitas, 19(4): 435 – 446.Frankena, William. 1974. “Sidgwick and the dualism of practical reason.” The Monist, 58(3): 449-467.Frankena, William. 1992. “Sidgwick and the history of ethical dualism.” In Essays on Henry Sidgwick, ed. Bart Schultz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 175-198.Gomberg, Paul. 1986. “Self and Others in Bentham and Sidgwick.” History of Philosophy Quarterly, 3(4): 437-448.Halevy, Elie. 1934. The Growth of philosophic radicalism. London: Farber and Farber limited.Harrison, Ross. 2001. “The Sanctions of of Utilitarianism.” In Henry Sidgwick, ed. Ross Harrison. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 93-116.Hooker, Brad. 2000. “Sidgwick and Common–Sense Morality.” Utilitas, 12(3): 347-360.Irwin, Terence. 2008. The Development of Ethics: A Historical and Critical Study (Vol. 3): From Kant to Rawls. New York: Oxford University Press.Lazari-Redak, Katarzyna de, and Singer, Peter. 2014. The point of view of Universe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Mill, John Stuart. 2003. Utilitarianism and On Liberty: including Mill’s ‘essay on Bentham’ and selections from the writings of Jeremy Bentham and John Austin (2nd), ed. Mary Warnock. UK: Blackwell Publishing.Mullins, Tereence Y. 1963.“Sidgwick`s Concept of Ethical Science.” Journal of the History of Ideas, 24(4): 584-588.Medma, Steven G. 2007. “‘Losing my religion’: Sidgwick, Theism, and the struggle for itilitarian ethics in economic analysis,” History of Political Economy, 40(5): 189-211.Moore, G.E. 1993. Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Nakai, Daisuke 2007. “Sidgwick’s social philosophy.” paper present at the 11th annual conference of the European Society for the History of Economic Thought, Strasbourg, July 5-7.Parfit, Derek. 2011. On What Matters (Vol.1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Phillips, David. 1998.“Sidgwick, Dualism and Indeterminacy in Practical Reason,” History of Philosophy Quarterly, 15(1): 57-78.Phillips, David. 2011. Sidgwickian Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Paley, William. 2002. The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy. Indianapolis: Liberty fund.Parekh, Bikhu. 2010. Jeremy Bentham: Ten Critical Essays. UK: Routledge.Rawls, John. 1999. A Theory of Justice. (rev.) Massachusetts: the Belknap press of Harvard University Press.Schneewind, J. B. 1963. “First principles and common sense morality in Sidgwick’s ethics,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 45(2): 137–156.Schneewind, J. B. 2007. Sidgwick’s Ethics and Victorian moral philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.Schultz, Bart. 2004. Henry Sidgwick: Eye of Universe: an intellectual biography. New York: Cambridge University Press.Schultz, Bart. 2017 The happiness philosophers: the lives and works of the great Utilitarians. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Shaver, Robert. 2014 “Sidgwick’s Axioms and Consequentialism.” Philosophical Review, 123(2): 173-204.Shaver, Robert. 2016.“Sidgwick on Pleasure.” Ethics, 126: 901-928.Sidgwick, Henry. 1876. “Professor Calderwood on Intuitionism in Morals.” In Essays on Ethics and Method, ed. Marcus G. Singer. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 23-26.Sidgwick, Henry. 1888. “Proceedings of the general meeting on July16th 1888.” Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, 5: 271-278.Sidgwick, Henry. 1892. Outlines of the History of Ethics for English readers. (3rd) London: Macmillian.Sidgwick, Henry. 1919. The Elements of Poltics. (4th) London: Macmillian.Sidgwick, Henry. 1981. The Methods of Ethics. (7th) Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.Sidgwick, Henry. 2000. “The Establishment of Ethical First Principles.”In Essays on Ethics and Method, ed. Marcus G. Singer Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 29-34.Sidgwick, Henry. 2000. “The Philosophy of Common Sense.” In Essays on Ethics and Method, ed. Marcus G. Singer Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 139-150.Singer, Peter. 1974. “Sidgwick and reflective equiliburium.” The Monist, 58(3): 490-517.Skelton, Anthony. 2006. “Henry Sidgwick’s Practical Ethics: A Defense.” Utilitas, 18(3): 199-207.Skelton, Anthony. 2010. “Henry Sidgwick’s Moral Epistemology.” Journal of the History of Philosophy, 48(4): 491-519.Skelton, Anthony. 2010. “on Sidgwick’s demise: a reply to professor Deigh.” Utilitas 22(1): 70-77.Turner, Frank. M. 1993.Contesting Culture Authority: Essays in Victorian Intellectual Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Whewell, William. 1852. Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy in England. London: W. Parker and son, west strand.Whewell, William.2007. The Principles of Morality, including Polity. London: John W. Parker, west strand.Williams, Bernard. 1995. “The point of view of the universe: Sidgwick and the ambitions of ethics.” in Making sense of humanity and other philosophical papers 1982-1993. Cambridge: Cambridge University press, pp. 153-171. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
政治學系
1042520101資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1042520101 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 陳建綱 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Chen, Chien-Kang en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 邱奕凱 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chiu, Yi-Kai en_US dc.creator (作者) 邱奕凱 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Chiu, Yi-Kai en_US dc.date (日期) 2019 en_US dc.date.accessioned 7-Aug-2019 16:46:41 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 7-Aug-2019 16:46:41 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 7-Aug-2019 16:46:41 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G1042520101 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/124929 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 政治學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 1042520101 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本論文聚焦於Henry Sidgwick（1838-1900）的倫理學思考，主要討論其著作《倫理學方法》（Methods of Ethics）之相關問題，該書細緻的論證了三種普通人判斷道德責任的方法：自利主義（Egoism）、直覺主義（Intuitionalism）與效益主義(Utilitarianism)，檢視這三種方法如何運作並討論三者的相互關係。關於自利主義與效益主義的統整上，他發現人們對於關乎自身利益與關乎集體利益兩者所做出的道德判斷指向了兩個不同的極端，難以在理論上統合，在實踐上也就有了兩個不同的標準。Sidgwick稱其為「實踐理性二元論（The Dualism of Practical Reason）」的困境，此為本篇論文最核心的問題意識：Sidgwick如何導出此結論？二元論的內涵和意義為何？本文首先從歷史出發，描繪形塑Sidgwick理論的背景，其中包含其個人生長經歷，以及他所承襲的學派。此部份重點在於呈現Sidgwick獨特的「直覺主義式效益主義」，他將幾股對立的思潮，凝聚成為自己特別的理論。接著闡述《倫理學方法》的實質內容，主要關於理性（reason）、應當（ought）及正確（right）等概念的涵義，以及直覺主義——常識道德與效益主義如何連結，並且由此展開關於實踐理性二元論的描述。此問題是Sidgwick對Bentham及Mill的修正，他試圖從理論面而非實踐、應然而非實然導出一個單一的倫理原則，最後產生的失敗。本文最後一部份是關於實踐理性二元論的詮釋，主要的切入點是Sidgwick對常識的重視而透露出的保守主義色彩。此種做法限縮了理性作用的空間，影響了兩種方法的證成。而本文亦發現，自利主義在ME中的證成是不完整的，那麼為何它足以成為對立於效益主義的另一個倫理方法？本文的回答時，Sidgwick此部分的書寫隱含對個人自由的保障，劃分出一塊不可為集體利益吸收的個人自利考量。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) This thesis focuses on the ethical thinking and related discussions of Henry Sidgwick’s Method of Ethics (ME). In this book, Sidgwick elucidated and discussed the mutual relations of three kinds of methods that are used in common people’s moral thinking: Egoism, Intuitionalism and Utilitarianism. In terms of the unifying of Egoism and Utilitarianism, Sidgwick discovered that the moral decisions made by common people when they concern about their own interests and about public interest point to two different directions; thereofore, it can not be easily unified as one in theory. Sidgwick called this difficulty as “the Dualism of Practical Reason”. How did he reach this conclusion, and what are the meaning and implication of it? I will start to answer these questions from historical perspective, describing the background of Sidgwick’s early life which has a great influence on his theory and the schools of thought that Sidgwick inherited. The importance of this historical review is to show how Sidgwick created his unique “Intuitional Utilitarianism” by fusing theories which contradict each other. Then I will describe the meaning and related arguments of Reason, Right and Ought in ME as well as how Intutionalism (Common Sense Morality) connects with Utilitarianism. The definition Sidgwick gave to these concepts and the connection between the two methods partly form the Dualism. In addition, the failure of Dualism was a result of his effort to modify Bentham and Mill’s theories by trying to get one ultimate moral criterion from theorical instead of practical point of view. In the final chapter of this thesis, I will elucidate how Sidgwick took Common Sense to justify other two methods and thus restricted the realm of Reason. I regard this as the conservative aspect of Sidgwick’s ME. Besides, I found that the justification of Egoism Sidgwick gave is not complete, which can be a breach leading Egoism to Utilitarianism. However, the conclusion of Dualism of Practical Reason shows that Sidgwick intended to use Egoism to conter Utilitarianism for the purpose of preserving a realm of individual freedom. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 目次 I緒論 1第一節 問題意識與研究動機 1第二節 分析架構 2第三節 章節安排 5第四節 小結 14第一章 Sidgwick生平與其思想的繼承與轉化 16第一節 歷史背景 16第二節 宗教與科學之對立：Sidgwick之繼承與掙扎 20第三節 小結 36第二章 《倫理學方法》之扼要與基本概念之界定 37第一節 何謂《倫理學方法》？ 37第二節 三種倫理學方法 47第三節 快樂與慾望 53第三章 直覺主義 60第一節 直覺主義三個階段與四個判準 60第二節 直覺主義式效益主義的兩階段論證 66第三節 關於Sidgwick直覺主義之討論 70第四節 小結 84第四章 實踐理性二元論 87第一節 效益主義的證明 87第二節 二元論問題意識對Bentham及Mill的檢視 90第三節 二元論的當代詮釋 101第四節 小結 110第五章 哲人與常民的對立：倫理學方法的解讀 111第一節 哲人思維與常民思維之對照 111第二節 對常識之崇敬：兩種實踐理性之證明 115第三節 實踐理性與政治 130第四節 小結 134第六章 結論 135第一節 Sidgwick的理論之回顧 135第二節 《倫理學方法》的保守詮釋 137參考文獻 141中文部分 141英文部分 141 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2728569 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1042520101 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 效益主義 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 直覺主義 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 實踐理性二元論 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 倫理學方法 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Utilitarianism en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Intuitionalism en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Dualism of practical reason en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Methods of ethics en_US dc.title (題名) 亨利．西季威克的《倫理學方法》與實踐理性二元論 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Henry Sidgwick`s Methods of Ethics and The Dualism of Practical Reason en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文部分亨利・西季威克著，廖申白（譯），1995。《倫理學方法》。台北：淑馨出版社。約翰・斯圖亞特・穆勒著，邱振訓（譯），2017。《效益主義》。新北：暖暖書屋文化。約翰・斯圖亞特・穆勒著，許寶騤（譯），2017。《論自由》。北京：商務印書館。陳江進，2013。《功利主義與實踐理性－西季威克道德哲學思想研究》。北京：人民出版社。曾國祥，2010。《主體危機與理性批判：自由主義的保守詮釋》。台北：巨流出版社。邊沁著，時殷弘（譯），2000。《道德與立法原理導論》。北京：商務印書館。C. D. 布勞德著，田永勝（譯），2002。《五種倫理學理論》。北京：中國社會科學出版社。G.E. 摩爾著，陳德中（譯），1993。《倫理學原理》。北京：商務印書館。陳建綱，2011。〈從同情共感到效益: 論《人性論》與《道德原理探索》的異與 同〉。《政治與社會哲學評論》，第38期，頁1-56。英文部分Bentham, Jeremy. 1962. “The rationale of reward.” In the works of Jeremy Bentham vol. 2, ed. John Bowring. New York: Russell and Russell, pp. 190-274.Bentham, Jeremy. 1970. The Collected Works of Jeremy Bentham: An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, eds. J. H. Burns and H. L. A. Hart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Bentham, Jeremy. 1983. Deontology together with A Table of the Springs of Action and the Article on Utilitarianism, ed. Amnon Goldworth. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Bentham, Jeremy. 1999.The Collected Works of Jeremy Bentham: Legislator of the World: Writings on Codification, Law, and Education, eds. Philip Schofield and Jonathan Harris. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Brink, D.O. 1988. “Sidgwick`s dualism of practical reason.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 66(3): 291-307.Brink, D.O. 1989. Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Brink, D.O. 1992. “Sidgwick and the rationale for rational egoism.” In Essays on Henry Sidgwick, ed. Bart Schultz. Cambridge: Cambridge university press, pp. 199-240.Brink, D.O. 1994. “Common Sense and First Principles in Sidgwick`s Methods.” Social Philosophy and Policy, 11(1): 179-201.Broad, C.D. 1967. Five Types of Ethical Theory. London: Routledge.Collini, Stefan. 2001.“My Roles and their Duties: Sidgwick as Philosopher, Professeor and Public Moralist.” In Henry Sidgwick, ed. Ross Harrison. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 9-50.Crisp, Roger. 1996. “The Dualism of Practical Reason.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, (96): 53-73.Crisp, Roger. 2002.“Sidgwick and the boundaries of intuitionism.” In Ethical Intuitionisms: re-evaulations, ed. Phillip Stratton-Lake. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 56-75.Crisp, Roger. 2011. “Pleasure and Hedonism in Sidgwick.” in Underivative Duty: British Moral Philosophers from Sidgwick to Ewing, ed. Thomas Hurka. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 26-44.Crisp, Roger. 2015. The cosmos of duty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Crisp, Roger., and Hooker, Brad. 2000. Well-being and morality: Essays in honour of James Griffin. Oxford: Clarendon press.Cremaschi, Sergio. 2008. “‘Nothing to invite or to reward a separate examination’: Sidgwick and Whewell.” Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics, 10(2): 137-184.Darwell, Stephen. 2000.“Sidgwick, Concern, and the Good.” Utilitas, 12(3):291 - 306.Deigh, John. 2007. “Sidgwick`s Epistemology.” Utilitas, 19(4): 435 – 446.Frankena, William. 1974. “Sidgwick and the dualism of practical reason.” The Monist, 58(3): 449-467.Frankena, William. 1992. “Sidgwick and the history of ethical dualism.” In Essays on Henry Sidgwick, ed. Bart Schultz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 175-198.Gomberg, Paul. 1986. “Self and Others in Bentham and Sidgwick.” History of Philosophy Quarterly, 3(4): 437-448.Halevy, Elie. 1934. The Growth of philosophic radicalism. London: Farber and Farber limited.Harrison, Ross. 2001. “The Sanctions of of Utilitarianism.” In Henry Sidgwick, ed. Ross Harrison. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 93-116.Hooker, Brad. 2000. “Sidgwick and Common–Sense Morality.” Utilitas, 12(3): 347-360.Irwin, Terence. 2008. The Development of Ethics: A Historical and Critical Study (Vol. 3): From Kant to Rawls. New York: Oxford University Press.Lazari-Redak, Katarzyna de, and Singer, Peter. 2014. The point of view of Universe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Mill, John Stuart. 2003. Utilitarianism and On Liberty: including Mill’s ‘essay on Bentham’ and selections from the writings of Jeremy Bentham and John Austin (2nd), ed. Mary Warnock. UK: Blackwell Publishing.Mullins, Tereence Y. 1963.“Sidgwick`s Concept of Ethical Science.” Journal of the History of Ideas, 24(4): 584-588.Medma, Steven G. 2007. “‘Losing my religion’: Sidgwick, Theism, and the struggle for itilitarian ethics in economic analysis,” History of Political Economy, 40(5): 189-211.Moore, G.E. 1993. Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Nakai, Daisuke 2007. “Sidgwick’s social philosophy.” paper present at the 11th annual conference of the European Society for the History of Economic Thought, Strasbourg, July 5-7.Parfit, Derek. 2011. On What Matters (Vol.1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Phillips, David. 1998.“Sidgwick, Dualism and Indeterminacy in Practical Reason,” History of Philosophy Quarterly, 15(1): 57-78.Phillips, David. 2011. Sidgwickian Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Paley, William. 2002. The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy. Indianapolis: Liberty fund.Parekh, Bikhu. 2010. Jeremy Bentham: Ten Critical Essays. UK: Routledge.Rawls, John. 1999. A Theory of Justice. (rev.) Massachusetts: the Belknap press of Harvard University Press.Schneewind, J. B. 1963. “First principles and common sense morality in Sidgwick’s ethics,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 45(2): 137–156.Schneewind, J. B. 2007. Sidgwick’s Ethics and Victorian moral philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.Schultz, Bart. 2004. Henry Sidgwick: Eye of Universe: an intellectual biography. New York: Cambridge University Press.Schultz, Bart. 2017 The happiness philosophers: the lives and works of the great Utilitarians. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Shaver, Robert. 2014 “Sidgwick’s Axioms and Consequentialism.” Philosophical Review, 123(2): 173-204.Shaver, Robert. 2016.“Sidgwick on Pleasure.” Ethics, 126: 901-928.Sidgwick, Henry. 1876. “Professor Calderwood on Intuitionism in Morals.” In Essays on Ethics and Method, ed. Marcus G. Singer. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 23-26.Sidgwick, Henry. 1888. “Proceedings of the general meeting on July16th 1888.” Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, 5: 271-278.Sidgwick, Henry. 1892. Outlines of the History of Ethics for English readers. (3rd) London: Macmillian.Sidgwick, Henry. 1919. The Elements of Poltics. (4th) London: Macmillian.Sidgwick, Henry. 1981. The Methods of Ethics. (7th) Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.Sidgwick, Henry. 2000. “The Establishment of Ethical First Principles.”In Essays on Ethics and Method, ed. Marcus G. Singer Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 29-34.Sidgwick, Henry. 2000. “The Philosophy of Common Sense.” In Essays on Ethics and Method, ed. Marcus G. Singer Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 139-150.Singer, Peter. 1974. “Sidgwick and reflective equiliburium.” The Monist, 58(3): 490-517.Skelton, Anthony. 2006. “Henry Sidgwick’s Practical Ethics: A Defense.” Utilitas, 18(3): 199-207.Skelton, Anthony. 2010. “Henry Sidgwick’s Moral Epistemology.” Journal of the History of Philosophy, 48(4): 491-519.Skelton, Anthony. 2010. “on Sidgwick’s demise: a reply to professor Deigh.” Utilitas 22(1): 70-77.Turner, Frank. M. 1993.Contesting Culture Authority: Essays in Victorian Intellectual Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Whewell, William. 1852. Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy in England. London: W. Parker and son, west strand.Whewell, William.2007. The Principles of Morality, including Polity. London: John W. Parker, west strand.Williams, Bernard. 1995. “The point of view of the universe: Sidgwick and the ambitions of ethics.” in Making sense of humanity and other philosophical papers 1982-1993. Cambridge: Cambridge University press, pp. 153-171. zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU201900585 en_US
