On Moral Properties

This paper is about the relation of resultance, signalled by the ‘because’ in ‘that was wrong because it was dishonest’. It distinguishes resultance from supervenience and uses that distinction to criticize R. M. Hare’s account of the logic of moral judgement in terms of his notion of universalizability. It considers the strengths and weaknesses of Ross’s novel notion of a prima facie duty and the distinction between prima facie duty and duty proper. And it argues that where one action’s rightness results from its having certain properties, it does not follow that all actions with those properties will be right, because other cases may have further properties acting as ‘defeaters’.