I am asking this for an answer providing deductive statements about some specific school of ethics: Kantian categorical imperative, Peter Singer's preference utilitarianism, etc. If asking for a brief series of syllogisms, being short to just get the idea across, would those syllogisms have a near infinite amount of possible answers (ignoring semantically redundant conditionals)? In other words, would there be a large amount of different answers, each getting across different general ideas about whichever specific school of ethics in the form of syllogisms?

Additionally, should a question like this be broken up into smaller chunks? Continuing for the preference utilitarianism example, would the question seek more specific answers by only asking for a syllogism about consequentialism (instead of multiple syllogisms for preference utilitarianism) or would this be more general than keeping the question as a whole?

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .