Citation:
ZHANG Min. The Structural Reflection of Institutional Utilitarianism on the Issue of Uncertainty of Outcome—Based on Russell Harding's Paradigm Renovation in the Study of Moral Strategies[J]. Academic Monthly, 2025, 57(1): 90-98.
The Structural Reflection of Institutional Utilitarianism on the Issue of Uncertainty of Outcome—Based on Russell Harding's Paradigm Renovation in the Study of Moral Strategies
-
Abstract
Utilitarianism originating from the empiricism tradition generally takes the form of consequentialism, that is to say, the principle of utilitarian maximization is based on the calculation of results. However, the feasibility of this utilitarian calculation and the accuracy of the calculation results have made it subject to great theoretical doubts. Contemporary Act-utilitarianism and Rule-utilitarianism are limited by research paradigms, and they mainly think about social public ethics from the perspective of micro-rational behavior, which cannot effectively solve the theoretical problems above. The contemporary institutional utilitarianism represented by Russell Harding has promoted a structural paradigm innovation. On the basis of proposing three rational limitations, the uncertainty of outcome is internalized into an interactive structure of different types of moral strategies, and through the method of game theory, the incentive situation of outcome utilitarianism is studied, and finally it is extended to institutional arrangements and rights protection that go deep into the social structure. Institutional utilitarianism explains the internal unity of behavior, rules and institutions in a broad sense, solves the theoretical disputes within contemporary utilitarianism more properly, and responds to the challenges and criticisms of New Liberalism from a higher moral perspective.
-
-
References
-
Access
-
-
[1]
XU Xiangdong
. Consciousness and The Moral Status of AI Agents. Academic Monthly,
2026, 58(8): 5-15.
-
[2]
LEI Lei
. Methodological Standpoint of Digital Jurisdiction: Functionalism, or Normativism?. Academic Monthly,
2026, 58(1): 108-119.
-
[3]
LI Ting
. From The Reproductive Institution to the Fertility Transition in Contemporary China. Academic Monthly,
2026, 58(7): 143-156.
-
[4]
RAN Gaoran
. The Evolution and Game of Property Systems——On the Paradigm Choice for Data Property. Academic Monthly,
2026, 58(7): 117-128.
-
[5]
XU Yong
. Community Consolidation through Institutions: An Analysis of the Micro-institutions of Small-Scale Groups. Academic Monthly,
2026, 58(3): 77-90.
-
[6]
LI Ming
, XU Haiqi
, XU Changtuo
. A Statistical Framework and Measurement Results for Public Finance Investing in People. Academic Monthly,
2026, 58(8): 91-105.
-
[7]
NI Liangkang
. The Philosophy of History of “New Idealism” after Hegel: Neo-Hegelianism. Academic Monthly,
2026, 58(7): 12-22.
-
[8]
HE Lei
. What Is Kant's “Problem of the Thing-in-Itself”——With a Concurrent Critique of Mou Zongsan's Assertion and Li Minghui's Defense. Academic Monthly,
2026, 58(3): 31-40.
-
[9]
LU Mingjun
. Simulacra, Pattern Recognition, and Computational Formalism——Reflections on the Application of AI in Artistic Practice and Art History Research. Academic Monthly,
2026, 58(8): 41-55.
-
-