Skip to main content

Moral Philosophy in Australasia

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
History of Philosophy in Australia and New Zealand
  • 838 Accesses

Abstract

Before returning to Australia from Oxford, Peter Singer (1973) concluded one of his earliest papers with the timely comment that ‘It is . . . necessary, before embarking on a discussion of morality, to make quite clear in what sense one is using terms like “moral judgment”, and what follows and what does not follow from such a use of the term. This is an essential preliminary; but it is only a preliminary. My complaint is that what should be regarded as something to be got out of the way in the introduction to a work of moral philosophy has become the subject-matter of almost the whole of moral philosophy in the English-speaking world’ (Singer 1973, p. 56). The preoccupation with linguistic analysis bemoaned by Singer would shortly give way to a global renaissance of work in normative and applied ethics, and philosophers in Australia and New Zealand have figured quite prominently in these developments while also producing cutting-edge work in metaethics and moral psychology. Although Australasian philosophy was traditionally much better known for its contributions to metaphysics than to moral philosophy, the emergence of influential work in normative ethics, metaethics and moral psychology over the last two decades has done much to raise the profile of Australasian moral philosophy internationally.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 549.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In this chapter I focus on work in moral philosophy done by philosophers working in Australia and New Zealand at the time they produced it, and so I therefore mostly exclude work done overseas by Australian- or New Zealand-born philosophers. Also, I concentrate primarily on work in the analytic rather than the continental tradition, and particularly on major developments in Australasian moral philosophy since 1950. The period in Australian philosophy prior to 1950 has been ably covered by others, such as Grave (1984), Scarlett (1992), Coady (1998), and Franklin (2003), and in Australasian philosophy more broadly, in the various entries under individual departments and topics, in Oppy and Trakakis (2010).

  2. 2.

    In his preface to the 1981 Hackett reissue of Sidgwick’s 1874 Methods of Ethics, John Rawls comments that English moral philosophy has been dominated by Utilitarianism for over two centuries.

  3. 3.

    For discussion of Bentham’s panopticon and its use in Port Arthur, see Driver (2007, pp. 42–43). Also, a little-known fact here is that Cambridge philosopher Henry Sidgwick, whose 1874 book The Methods of Ethics is hailed by many contemporary moral philosophers as the most fully and systematically worked out form of utilitarianism thus far developed, graduated from Rugby School in the same class as Tom Wills, who is credited with creating Australian rules football in the late 1850s by blending the rules of rugby with those of the Australian indigenous game known as ‘marn-grook’. It is intriguing to speculate about whether Wills, who also became a star cricketer for Cambridge University (and later founded the Melbourne and Geelong football clubs), consulted Sidgwick about the rules for the new game that he was devising. Sidgwick refers to various games (and especially cricket) in his writings, including in his discussion of pleasure, but there is apparently no mention of Australian football in Sidgwick’s published writings.

  4. 4.

    Note that Peter Singer’s interest in Utilitarianism and its strong commitment to impartiality, along with his wariness of any objectivist metaethic, seems to have been influenced by his strong sense of the horrors of Nazism, which directly impacted on his parents and grandparents. See Singer’s replies in Jamieson (1999). Also, an important contribution to discussions of moral relativism is Levy (2002a).

  5. 5.

    Also important here are Chin Liew Ten’s (1980) criticisms of Mill’s ‘proof’ of the principle of utility.

  6. 6.

    A good example of more recent Australian work on decision theory and consequentialism is Colyvan et al. (2010).

  7. 7.

    In his subsequent book, McCloskey (1971) discusses these criticisms in relation to Mill’s utilitarianism, and demonstrates how Mill is an act utilitarian rather than a rule utilitarian.

  8. 8.

    The 2008 Australian Catholic University Eureka Prize for Research in Ethics was awarded to Cullity for this book, and he decided to donate the $10,000 prize money to charity (see The Age 12 October 2010).

  9. 9.

    Michael Smith (2005) has argued that virtually all ethical theories can be understood as forms of consequentialism, at least when it is construed in a minimalist way as telling us that we ought to do that which we have most reason to do. See also Smith (2009) for a discussion of how the idea of rights as side-constraints can also be understood in consequentialist terms, and Jackson and Smith (2006).

  10. 10.

    This book, published as part of Blackwell’s ‘Great Debates in Philosophy’ series, originated as a mini-conference on ‘Consequentialism, Kantianism, and Virtue Ethics’ held at Monash University in 1995, and featured the authors along with local speakers. The three authors cite Smart and Williams’ Utilitarianism: For and Against (1973) as ‘the closest predecessor’ to this volume.

  11. 11.

    Mulgan currently has a chair in philosophy at the University of St Andrews, and he has recently published Understanding Utilitarianism (2007).

  12. 12.

    See also here Pettit and Brennan (1986) and Kilcullen (1983).

  13. 13.

    This book won the 2009 American Philosophical Association prize for the best book by a young philosopher published in the previous 2 years.

  14. 14.

    In cases of tragic dilemmas Hursthouse holds that a decision about what to do in such a dilemma is right if and only if it is what a virtuous agent would (acting in character) decide, ‘but the action decided upon may be too terrible to be called “right” or “good”’ (1999, p. 79). Here Hursthouse also makes a valuable contribution to debates in moral philosophy about what are often called ‘evaluative remainders’ (see Stocker 1990, 1996), and about what the emotions which are usually thought appropriate in regard to such remainders (e.g. regret, remorse, or even guilt) might show about utilitarian and consequentialist approaches, which find it difficult to recognise how such emotions could be appropriate, if what the agent did was the right course of action to take.

  15. 15.

    Hursthouse acknowledges that certain traits may serve some of these ends better than other of these ends. See also Perrett and Patterson (1991).

  16. 16.

    Swanton’s work has also influenced, and been influenced by, other non-eudaimonist approaches to virtue ethics, such as that developed by Michael Slote (see, e.g., Slote 1992, 2001), who has been a regular visitor to the University of Auckland—though Slote’s agent-based approach differs significantly from Swanton’s target-centred account. For recent Australasian work on agent-based virtue ethics, see Cox (2006) and van Zyl (2009). In 2002 the University of Canterbury held a conference on ‘Virtue ethics: Old and New’, in which many of the world’s most prominent virtue ethicists participated, and this resulted in an important edited collection: Gardiner (2005). See also the contributions discussing virtue ethics in Pigden (ed) (2009). Other examples of Australian books on virtue ethics are van Hooft (2006, 2013).

  17. 17.

    See also Green and Mews (eds) (2011) and Broad (forthcoming). University of NSW philosopher and mathematician James Franklin led an ARC-funded research project from 2006 to 2008 on restraint and the virtue of temperance, while Australian Catholic University philosopher Bernadette Tobin has written extensively on Aristotelian virtue and moral education: see, e.g. Tobin (1989, 2000).

  18. 18.

    See also Das (2003). This line of objection was developed in more detail by the US philosopher Robert N. Johnson (2003). A useful discussion of related issues can be found in Moore (2007).

  19. 19.

    For responses to such concerns, see Cocking and Oakley (2010) and Oakley (2011).

  20. 20.

    Also, Janna Thompson (1998) wrote an important book on the related, though somewhat different, perspective of discourse ethics. See also Joe Mintoff’s (1997) criticisms of contractarian approaches to ethics.

  21. 21.

    Gaita also wrote a best-selling memoir about his childhood, Romulus My Father (Melbourne: Text, 1998), which subsequently became a highly acclaimed film.

  22. 22.

    See also Ramsay (1997) and Oderberg and Laing (eds) (1997).

  23. 23.

    For instance, La Trobe University philosopher Janna Thompson began teaching a semester-length subject on feminism that was widely known for its popularity.

  24. 24.

    In counterpoint to Lloyd, see Green (1995), which contests the claim that philosophical ideals of reason have excluded the feminine.

  25. 25.

    See also the influential work of expatriate New Zealand philosopher Annette Baier, whose article ‘The Need for More than Justice’ (1987) was a key stimulus for these debates. In her widely cited article ‘Trust and Anti-Trust’ (1986), Baier comments that the great moral philosophers have, by and large, been single males who had minimal dealings with women. They were, she says, mostly ‘clerics, misogynists and puritan bachelors’ who focused ‘single-mindedly on cool, distanced relations between more or less free and equal adult strangers’ (1986, p. 248).

  26. 26.

    Martha Nussbaum engaged in a memorable exchange with Peter Singer when she gave the 2003 Tanner Lectures in Human Values at the Australian National University. Nussbaum’s lectures subsequently formed the basis of her (2006) book.

  27. 27.

    Also, Singer has inspired many of his graduate students to become leading bioethicists in their own right (such as Julian Savulescu and Udo Schuklenk), and he has shown himself very capable of helping his students to develop arguments which conflict with his own views.

  28. 28.

    Michael Tooley subsequently worked for some time in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Western Australia, as did Mary Anne Warren, who made important contributions in applied ethics and feminist perspectives on ethics.

  29. 29.

    Clarke and Oakley were awarded the 2004 Australian Catholic University Eureka Prize for Research in Ethics for this work.

  30. 30.

    Levy’s 2007 book, Neuroethics: Challenges for the 21st Century, won the 2009 Australian Catholic University Eureka Prize for Research in Ethics, and Levy is also the founding editor of the international refereed journal, Neuroethics, which began in 2008.

  31. 31.

    This book won the 2011 Australian Catholic University Eureka Prize for Research in Ethics.

  32. 32.

    Stanley Benn’s (1975, 1988) work on autonomy and freedom has also been important here. See also Gaus (1989).

  33. 33.

    See also Malpas and Solomon (eds) (1998) and Perrett (1987).

  34. 34.

    See also Jackson and Pettit’s (1995) development of a moral analogue to functionalism in philosophy of mind, analysing terms such as good, right, and fair in terms of the role that they typically play in ‘folk morality’. This sort of approach to philosophical analysis more generally is an important part of what is sometimes referred to as the ‘Canberra Plan’. See also Hamilton (2008).

  35. 35.

    In her well-known paper ‘Moral Saints’, Susan Wolf (1982) uses a different argument to support a similar view about morality.

References

  • Agar, N. (2004). Liberal eugenics. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agar, N. (2010). Humanity’s end: Why we should reject radical enhancement. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allhoff, F., Lin, P., Moor, J., & Weckert, J. (Eds.). (2007). Nanoethics: The ethical and social implications of nanotechnology. Hoboken: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baier, K. (1958). The moral point of view. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baier, A. (1986). Trust and anti-trust. Ethics, 96, 231–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baier, A. (1987). The need for more than justice. In M. Hanen & K. Nielsen (Eds.), Science, morality and feminist theory: Canadian journal of philosophy supplementary volume (pp. 41–56). Calgary: University of Calgary Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballantyne, A. (2008a). ‘Fair Benefits’ accounts of exploitation require a normative principle of fairness: Response to Gbadegesin and Wendler, and Emanuel et al. Bioethics, 22, 239–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballantyne, A. (2008b). Benefits to research subjects in international trials: Do they reduce exploitation or increase undue inducement? Developing World Bioethics, 8, 178–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baltzly, D. (2003). Peripatetic perversions: A Neo-Aristotelian account of the nature of sexual perversion. The Monist, 86, 3–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benn, S. (1975). Freedom, autonomy and the concept of a person. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 76, 109–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benn, S. (1985). Wickedness. Ethics, 95, 795–810.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benn, S. (1988). A theory of freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biegler, P. (2011). The ethical treatment of depression: Autonomy through psychotherapy. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackford, R. (2006a). Dr. Frankenstein meets Lord Devlin: Genetic engineering and the principle of intangible harm. The Monist, 89, 526–547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackford, R. (2006b). Sinning against nature: The theory of background conditions. Journal of Medical Ethics, 32, 629–634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowden, P. (1997). Caring: Gender-sensitive ethics. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broad, J. (forthcoming). Mary Astell and the virtues. In P. Weiss and A. Sowaal (Eds.), Feminist interpretations of Mary Astell. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brock, G. (2009). Global justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. (1987). Analyzing love. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, D. (1990). Ethics without morality. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 68, 395–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckle, S. (1988). Arguing from potential. Bioethics, 2, 227–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckle, S. (1991). Natural Law and the theory of property: Grotius to Hume. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckle, S. (2002). Aristotle’s republic, or why Aristotle’s ethics is not virtue ethics. Philosophy, 77, 565–595.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A. (1989). A report from New Zealand: An ‘Unfortunate Experiment’. Bioethics, 3, 59–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A. (1995). Ethics in a bicultural context. Bioethics, 9, 149–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. (1983). Kantian conceptions of moral goodness. Canadian Philosophical Quarterly, 13, 527–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. (1999). Can philosophical accounts of altruism survive experimental data on helping behaviour? Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 77, 26–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K. (1986). A Stoic philosophy of life. Lanham: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannold, L. (1998). The abortion myth. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charlesworth, M. (1989). Life, death, genes, and ethics. Sydney: ABC Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charlesworth, M. (1992). Bioethics in a liberal society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, S., & Oakley, J. (2004). Informed consent and surgeons’ performance. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 29, 11–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, S., & Oakley, J. (Eds.). (2007). Informed consent and clinician accountability: The ethics of report cards on surgeon performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coady, C. (1988). Deterrent intentions revisited. Ethics, 99, 98–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coady, C. (1998). Australia, philosophy in. In E. Craig (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy (pp. 574–584). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coady, C. (2004). Terrorism, morality, and supreme emergency. Ethics, 114, 772–789.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cocking, D., & Van Den Hoven, J. (forthcoming). Evil online. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cocking, D., & Kennett, J. (2000). Friendship and moral danger. Journal of Philosophy, 97, 278–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cocking, D., & Oakley, J. (1995). Indirect consequentialism, friendship, and the problem of alienation. Ethics, 106, 86–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cocking, D., & Oakley, J. (2010). Professional interpretation and judgment, and the integrity of lawyers. In T. Dare & W. Wendel (Eds.), Professional ethics and personal integrity (pp. 68–78). Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coghlan, P. (2005). The prodigal and his brother: Impartiality and the equal consideration of interests. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 26, 195–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, S. (1999). ‘Good Ethics is Good Business’—revisited. Business and Professional Ethics Journal, 18, 57–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, S. (2004). The ethics of artificial uteruses: Implications for reproduction and abortion. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colyvan, M., Cox, D., & Steele, K. (2010). Modeling the moral dimensions of decisions. Nous, 44, 503–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cordner, C. (1994). Aristotelian virtue and its limitations. Philosophy, 69, 291–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, D. (2006). Agent-based theories of right action. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 9, 505–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, D., La Caze, M., & Levine, M. (2003). Integrity and the fragile self. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosthwaite, J. (2009). Gender and bioethics. In H. Kuhse & P. Singer (Eds.), A companion to bioethics (2nd ed., pp. 36–45). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosthwaite, J., & Priest, G. (1996). The definition of sexual harassment. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 74, 66–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullity, G. (1999). Virtue ethics, theory, and warrant. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 2, 277–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullity, G. (2004a). The moral demands of affluence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullity, G. (2004b). Sympathy, discernment, and reasons. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 64, 37–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Arcy, E. (1963). Human acts: an essay in their moral evaluation. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dare, T. (1998). Virtue ethics and legal ethics. Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 28, 141–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dare, T. (2009). The counsel of rogues? A defence of the standard conception of the lawyer’s role. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darley, J., & Batson, D. (1973). From Jerusalem to Jericho: A study of situational and dispositional variables in helping behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 100–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Das, R. (2003). Virtue ethics and right action. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 81, 324–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodds, S. (2010). Feminist bioethics. In G. Oppy & N. Trakakis (Eds.), A companion to philosophy in Australia and New Zealand (pp. 181–184). Melbourne: Monash University Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodds, S., & Jones, K. (1989). Surrogacy and autonomy. Bioethics, 3, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, C., Kerridge, I., & Ankeny, R. (2008). Managing intentions: The end-of-life administration of analgesics and sedatives, and the possibility of slow euthanasia. Bioethics, 22, 388–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver, J. (2007). Ethics: The fundamentals. Malden: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, R. (1987). The possibility of weakness of will. Indianapolis: Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, R. (1996). Facts about natural values. Environmental Values, 5, 221–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewin, R.E. (1981). Co-operation and human values: A study of moral reasoning. Brighton: Harvester Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewin, R. (1991). Virtues and rights: The moral philosophy of Thomas Hobbes. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewin, R. (1992). Loyalty and virtues. The Philosophical Quarterly, 42, 403–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, N. (1988). When did I begin? Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, J. (2003). Corrupting the youth: A history of philosophy in Australia. Sydney: Macleay Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaita, R. (1999). A common humanity: Thinking about love and truth and justice. Melbourne: Text.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaita, R. (1991/2004). Good and evil: An absolute conception. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner, S. (Ed.). (2005). Virtue ethics: Old and new. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatens, M. (1996). Imaginary bodies: Ethics, power and corporeality. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaus, G. (1989). Practical reason and moral persons. Ethics, 100, 127–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillam, L., & Sullivan, J. (2011). Ethics at the end of life: Who should make decisions about treatment limitation for young children with life-threatening or life-limiting conditions? Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 47, 594–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillam, L., Guilleman, M., Bolitho, A., & Rosenthal, D. (2009). Human research ethics in practice: Deliberative strategies, processes and perceptions. Monash Bioethics Review, 28, 07.1–07.17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillett, G. (1987). AIDS and confidentiality. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 4, 15–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillett, G. (1990). Consciousness, the brain, and what matters. Bioethics, 4, 181–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillett, G. (1994). Killing, letting die, and moral perception. Bioethics, 8, 312–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillett, G. (1999). The mind and its discontents: An essay in discursive psychiatry. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godwin, W. (1968). Thoughts occasioned by the perusal of Dr Parr’s Spital Sermon. In J. Marken & B. Pollin (Eds.), Uncollected writings (1785–1822) by William Godwin (pp. 281–374). Gainesville: Scholars Facsimiles and Reprints.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, R. (1989). No smoking: The ethical issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, R. (1995). Utilitarianism as a public philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grace, D., & Cohen, S. (2005). Business ethics: Problems and cases (3rd ed.). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grave, S. (1984). A history of philosophy in Australia. St Lucia: University of Queensland Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, K. (1995). The woman of reason: Feminism, humanism, and political thought. London: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, K. (2012). Virtue ethics and the origins of feminism. The case of Christine de Pizan. In E. O’Neill & M. Lascano (Eds.), Feminist history of philosophy: The recovery and evaluation of women’s philosophical thought. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, K., & Mews, C. (Eds.). (2011). Virtue ethics for women 1250–1500. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haakonssen, K. (1996). Natural law and moral philosophy: From Grotius to the Scottish enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, R. (2008). The Darwinian Cage: Evolutionary psychology as moral science. Theory, Culture and Society, 25, 105–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare, R. (1963). Freedom and reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare, R. (1981). Moral thinking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare, R. (1993). Moral problems about the control of behavior. In R. Hare (Ed.), Essays on bioethics (pp. 50–66). Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holton, R. (1999). Intention and weakness of will. Journal of Philosophy, 96, 241–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hursthouse, R. (1987). Beginning lives. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hursthouse, R. (1991). Virtue theory and abortion. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 20, 223–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hursthouse, R. (1999). On virtue ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, F. (1991). Decision-theoretic consequentialism and the nearest and dearest objection. Ethics, 101, 461–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, F., & Pettit, P. (1995). Moral functionalism and moral motivation. The Philosophical Quarterly, 45, 20–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, F., & Smith, M. (2006). Absolutist moral theories and uncertainty. Journal of Philosophy, 103, 267–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamieson, D. (Ed.). (1999). Singer and his critics. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. (2003). Virtue and right. Ethics, 113, 810–834.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, M.-J. (2009). Bioethics: A nursing perspective. Sydney: Churchill-Livingstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. (1991). Fetal neural transplantation: Placing the ethical debate within the context of society’s use of human material. Bioethics, 5, 23–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D., & Whitaker, M. (2009). Speaking for the dead: The human body in biology and medicine. Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, K. (2003). Emotion, weakness of will, and the normative conception of agency. In A. Hatzimoysis (Ed.), Philosophy and the emotions (pp. 181–200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, K. (2004). Trust and terror. In M. Walker & P. DesAutels (Eds.), Minds, hearts, and morality: Feminist essays in moral psychology (pp. 3–18). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, L., & Wuerth, J. (Eds.). (2011). Perfecting virtue: New essays on Kantian ethics and virtue ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, R. (2001). The myth of morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, S. (2007a). The limits of loyalty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, S. (2007b). Virtue ethics is self-effacing. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 85, 221–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennett, J. (1993). Mixed motives. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 71, 256–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennett, J. (2001). Agency and responsibility: A commonsense moral psychology. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennett, J., & Fine, C. (2004). Mental impairment, moral understanding and mitigation: Psychopathy and the purposes of punishment. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 27, 425–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilcullen, J. (1983). Utilitarianism and virtue. Ethics, 93, 451–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komesaroff, P. (2002). Response to Susan Dodds: Is the Australian HREC system sustainable? Monash Bioethics Review, 21, S68–S71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kovesi, J. (1967). Moral notions. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhse, H. (1987). The sanctity-of-life doctrine in medicine: A critique. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhse, H. (Ed.). (1994). Willing to listen—wanting to die. Melbourne: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhse, H. (1997). Caring: Nurses, women and ethics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhse, H., & Singer, P. (Eds.). (1985). Should the baby live? Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhse, H., & Singer, P. (Eds). (1998/2009). A companion to bioethics. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhse, H. and Singer, P. (Eds) (1999/2006). Bioethics: An anthology. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Caze, M. (2005). Love, that indispensable supplement: Irigaray and Kant on love and respect. Hypatia, 20, 92–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Caze, M. (2010). Feminist philosophy. In G. Oppy & N. Trakakis (Eds.), A companion to philosophy in Australia and New Zealand (pp. 184–188). Melbourne: Monash University Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamb, R. (Ed.). (1997). Love analysed. Colorado: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamont, J. (1997). Incentive income, deserved income and economic rents. Journal of Political Philosophy, 5, 26–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lange M., Rogers W., & Dodds S. (2013). Vulnerability in research ethics: A way forward. Bioethics, 27, 333–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langton, R. (1992). Duty and desolation. Philosophy, 67, 481–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langton, R. (1993). Speech acts and unspeakable acts. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22, 293–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, N. (2002a). Moral relativism: A short introduction. London: Oneworld.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, N. (2002b). Reconsidering cochlear implants: The lessons of Martha’s Vineyard. Bioethics, 16, 134–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, N. (2007). Neuroethics: Challenges for the 21st century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, N., & Lotz, M. (2005). Reproductive cloning and a (kind of) genetic fallacy. Bioethics, 19, 232–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipworth, W., Carter, S., & Kerridge, I. (2008). The ‘EBM movement’: Where did it come from, where is it going and why does it matter? Social Epistemology, 22, 425–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, G. (1984). The man of reason: ‘Male’ and ‘female’ in western philosophy. London: Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loff, B., & Black, J. (2000). The declaration of Helsinki and research in vulnerable populations. Medical Journal of Australia, 172, 292–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lotz, M. (2009). Procreative reasons-relevance: On the moral significance of why we have children. Bioethics, 23, 291–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, C. (1992). Abortion and embodiment. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 70, 55–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, C., & Stoljar, N. (Eds.). (2000). Relational autonomy: Feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency and the social self. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackie, J. (1946). A refutation of morals. Australasian Journal of Psychology and Philosophy, 24, 77–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackie, J. (1977). Ethics: Inventing right and wrong. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malpas, J., & Solomon, R. (Eds.). (1998). Death and philosophy. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning, J. (Ed.). (2009). The Cartwright papers: Essays on the cervical cancer inquiry of 1987–88. Wellington: Bridget Williams Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, G. (1980). Overdetermination and the emotions. In A. Rorty (Ed.), Explaining emotions (pp. 197–222). Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, H. (1957). An examination of restricted utilitarianism. Philosophical Review, 66, 466–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, H. (1965). A non-utilitarian approach to punishment. Inquiry, 8, 249–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, H. (1971). John Stuart Mill: A critical study. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDougall, R. (2005). Acting parentally: An argument against sex selection. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31, 601–605.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDougall, R. (2007). Parental virtue: A new way of thinking about the morality of reproductive actions. Bioethics, 21, 181–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKie, J., Richardson, J., Singer, P., & Kuhse, H. (1998). The allocation of health care resources: An ethical evaluation of the ‘QALY’ approach. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, P. (1993). The ethics and politics of human experimentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medlin, B. (1957). Ultimate principles and ethical egoism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 35, 111–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J. (1962). Utilitarianism. Cleveland: Meridian Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S., Blackler, J., & Alexandra, A. (2006). Police ethics (2nd ed.). Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, C. (2011). Futures of reproduction: Bioethics and biopolitics. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintoff, J. (1997). Rational cooperation, intention, and reconsideration. Ethics, 107, 612–643.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monro, D. (1967). Empiricism and ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, A. (2007). Ethical theory, completeness, and consistency. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 10, 297–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan, T. (2001). The demands of consequentialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan, T. (2007). Understanding utilitarianism. Stocksfield: Acumen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakley, J. (1992). Morality and the emotions. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakley, J. (1996). Varieties of virtue ethics. Ratio, 9, 128–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakley, J. (2003). Medical ethics, history of: Australia and New Zealand. In S. Post (Ed.), Encyclopedia of bioethics (3rd ed., pp. 5–1553). New York: Macmillan. vol. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakley, J. (2011). Justice, post-retirement shame, and the failure of the standard conception of lawyers’ roles. Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy, 36, 177–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakley, J., & Cocking, D. (2001). Virtue ethics and professional roles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oddie, G., & Menzies, P. (1992). An objectivist’s guide to subjective value. Ethics, 102, 512–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oderberg, D. (2010). Deontology. In G. Oppy & N. Trakakis (Eds.), A companion to philosophy in Australia and New Zealand. Melbourne: Monash University Publishing. http://books.publishing.monash.edu/apps/bookworm/view/A+Companion+to+Philosophy+in+Australia+and+New+Zealand/56/xhtml/chapter04.html#chapter04sec02.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oderberg, D., & Laing, J. (Eds.). (1997). Human lives: Critical essays on non-consequentialist bioethics. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppy, G., Trakakis, N., Burns, L., Gardner, S., & Leigh, F. (Eds.). (2010). A companion to philosophy in Australia and New Zealand. Melbourne: Monash University Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otago University. (n. d.). Philosophical history: The Otago Department. Otago Philosophy. http://www.otago.ac.nz/philosophy/history.html

  • Perrett, R. (1987). Death and immortality. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrett, R., & Patterson, J. (1991). Virtue ethics and maori ethics. Philosophy East and West, 41, 185–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettit, P. (1991). Consequentialism. In P. Singer (Ed.), A companion to ethics (pp. 230–237). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettit, P. (1997). The consequentialist perspective. In M. Baron, P. Pettit, & M. Slote (Eds.), Three methods of ethics: A debate. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettit, P., & Brennan, G. (1986). Restrictive consequentialism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 64, 438–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pigden, C. (1990). Geach on ‘Good’. The Philosophical Quarterly, 40, 129–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pigden, C. (Ed.). (2009). Hume on motivation and virtue. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plumwood, V. (1991). Nature, self, and gender: Feminism, environmental philosophy, and the critique of rationalism. Hypatia, 6, 3–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pogge, T. (2005). Human rights and global health: A research program. Metaphilosophy, 36, 182–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Primoratz, I. (2002). Michael Walzer’s Just War theory: Some issues of responsibility. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 5, 221–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Railton, P. (1984). Alienation, consequentialism, and the demands of morality. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 13, 134–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay, H. (1997). Beyond virtue: Integrity and morality. New York: St Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reader, S., & Brock, G. (2004). Needs, moral demands and moral theory. Utilitas, 16, 251–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, W., & Ballantyne, A. (2008). When is sex-specific research appropriate? International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, 1, 36–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, R. (1992). Living laboratories: Women and reproductive technologies. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, L. (2007). Is evil action qualitatively distinct from ordinary wrongdoing? Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 85, 659–677.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, D. (2009). Practical intelligence and the virtues. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savulescu, J. (2001). Procreative beneficence: Why we should select the best children. Bioethics, 15, 413–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savulescu, J. (2006). Sex selection: The case for. In H. Kuhse & P. Singer (Eds.), Bioethics: An anthology (2nd ed., pp. 145–149). Malden: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savulescu, J., & Bostrom, N. (Eds.). (2009). Human enhancement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarlett, B. (1992). Moral philosophy 1945–1980. In J. Srzednicki & W. David (Eds.), Essays on philosophy in Australia (pp. 51–77). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroeter, F. (2006). The limits of sentimentalism. Ethics, 116, 337–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schüklenk, U. (1998). Access to experimental drugs in terminal illness: Ethical issues. New York: Pharmaceutical Products Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selgelid, M. (2007). Ethics and drug resistance. Bioethics, 21, 218–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selgelid, M., & Miller, S. (2008). Ethical and philosophical consideration of the dual-use dilemma in the biological sciences. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selgelid, M., Battin, M., & Smith, C. (Eds.). (2006). Ethics and infectious disease. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, N. (1997). Making a necessity of virtue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidgwick, H. (1981). The methods of ethics (7th ed.). Indianapolis: Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1972). Famine, affluence, and morality. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1, 229–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1973). The triviality of the debate over ‘Is-Ought’ and the definition of ‘Moral’. American Philosophical Quarterly, 10, 51–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1975). Animal liberation. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1979/1993/2011). Practical ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (Ed.). (1986). Applied ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1991). A companion to ethics. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1994a). Rethinking life and death. Melbourne: Text.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (Ed.). (1994b). Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (2009). The life you can save: Acting now to end world poverty. Melbourne: Text.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P., & Kuhse, H. (2006). 1980–2005: Bioethics then and now. Monash Bioethics Review, 25, 9–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P., & Wells, D. (1984). The reproduction revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P., Kuhse, H., Buckle, S., Dawson, K., & Kasimba, P. (Eds.). (1990). Embryo experimentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slote, M. (1992). From morality to virtue. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slote, M. (2001). Morals from motives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. J. C. (1956). Extreme and restricted utilitarianism. Philosophical Quarterly, 6, 344–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. J. C. (1961). An outline of a system of utilitarian ethics. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press (on behalf of the University of Adelaide).

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. J. C. (1973). An outline of a system of utilitarian ethics. In J. J. C. Smart & B. Williams (Eds.), Utilitarianism: For and against. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. (1994). The moral problem. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. (2005). Meta-ethics. In F. Jackson & M. Smith (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of contemporary philosophy (pp. 3–30). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. (2009). Two kinds of consequentialism. Philosophical Issues, 19, 257–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow, R. (2005). Defending deaf culture: The case of cochlear implants. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 13, 135–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow, R. (2006). Cloning, parenthood, and genetic relatedness. Bioethics, 20, 308–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow, R. (2009). Building a better warbot: Ethical issues in the design of unmanned systems for military applications. Science and Engineering Ethics, 15, 169–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow, R. (2010). Better than men? Sex and the therapy/enhancement distinction. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 20, 115–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow, R. (2011). A not-so-new eugenics: Harris and Savulescu on human enhancement. The Hastings Center Report, 41, 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spriggs, M. (2005). Autonomy and patients’ decisions. Maryland: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spriggs, M. (2009). Consent in cyberspace: Internet-based research involving young people. Monash Bioethics Review, 28, 32.1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocker, M. (1976). The schizophrenia of modern ethical theories. Journal of Philosophy, 73, 453–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocker, M. (1979). Desiring the bad: An essay in moral psychology. Journal of Philosophy, 76, 738–753.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocker, M. (1980). Intellectual desire, emotion, and action. In A. Rorty (Ed.), Explaining emotions (pp. 323–338). Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocker, M. (1983a). Affectivity and self-concern: The assumed psychology in Aristotle’s ethics. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 64, 211–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocker, M. (1983b). Psychic feelings: Their importance and irreducibility. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 61, 5–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocker, M. (1987). Emotional thoughts. American Philosophical Quarterly, 24, 59–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocker, M. (1990). Plural and conflicting values. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocker, M. (1996). Valuing emotions. New York: Cambridge University Press (with Hegeman, E.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoljar, N. (2011). Informed consent and relational conceptions of autonomy. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 36, 375–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanton, C. (2003). Virtue ethics, a pluralistic view. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C. (2002). Sympathy: A philosophical analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C. (2011). Moralism: A study of a vice. Durham: Acumen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ten, C. (1980). Mill on liberty. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. (1998). Discourse and knowledge: Defence of a collectivist ethics. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. (2009). Intergenerational justice: Rights and responsibilities in an intergenerational polity. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, B. (1989). An Aristotelian theory of moral development. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 23, 195–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, B. (2000). The virtues in John Wilson’s approach to moral education. Journal of Moral Education, 29, 301–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, B. (2005). Australian consequentialism: An Australian critique. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 26, 165–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tong, R., Donchin, A., & Dodds, S. (Eds.). (2004). Linking visions feminist bioethics, human rights and the developing world. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tooley, M. (1972). Abortion and infanticide. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 2, 37–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uniacke, S. (1984). The doctrine of double effect. The Thomist, 48, 188–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uniacke, S. (1994). Permissible killing: The self-defence justification of homicide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uniacke, S., & McCloskey, H. (1992). Peter Singer and non-voluntary ‘Euthanasia’: Tripping down the slippery slope. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 9, 203–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Hoven, J., & Weckert, J. (Eds.). (2008). Information technology and moral philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Hooft, S. (2006). Understanding virtue ethics. Chesham: Acumen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Hooft, S. (2011). Caring, objectivity and justice: An integrative view. Nursing Ethics, 18, 149–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Hooft, S. (Eds) (2013). The handbook of virtue ethics. Durham: Acumen.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Zyl, L. (2000). Death and compassion: A virtue-based approach to euthanasia. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Zyl, L. (2009). Agent-based virtue ethics and the problem of action guidance. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 6, 50–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Zyl, L. (2011). Right action and the non-virtuous agent. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 28, 80–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, A., & Lynch, T. (2003). The development of price formation theory and subjectivism about ultimate values. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 20, 263–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters, W., & Singer, P. (Eds.). (1982). Test-tube babies: A guide to moral questions, present techniques and future possibilities. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, D. (2009). The window of opportunity: Decision theory and the timing of prognostic tests for newborn infants. Bioethics, 23, 503–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, M. (2007). Individual and family decisions about organ donation. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 24, 26–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, M., & Moore, A. (1997). Inducement in research. Bioethics, 11, 89–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, S. (1982). Moral saints. Journal of Philosophy, 79, 419–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfendale, J. (2007). Torture and the military profession. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, R. (1986). Personal autonomy: Beyond negative and positive liberty. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, R. (2007). Medically-assisted death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zion, D. (1998). ‘Moral Taint’ or ethical responsibility? Unethical information and the problem of HIV clinical trials in developing countries. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 15, 231–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zion, D., Briskman, L., & Loff, B. (2010). Returning to history: The ethics of researching asylum seeker health in Australia. The American Journal of Bioethics, 10, 48–56.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Nick Trakakis and Graham Oppy for their advice, and to Keith Campbell, Roger Crisp, Satoshi Kodama, and Barry and Carmel Oakley for their comments and suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Justin Oakley .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this entry

Cite this entry

Oakley, J. (2014). Moral Philosophy in Australasia. In: Oppy, G., Trakakis, N. (eds) History of Philosophy in Australia and New Zealand. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6958-8_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6958-8_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-007-6957-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6958-8

  • eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and Law

Publish with us

Policies and ethics