Good and Good-for. Rønnow‐Rasmussen, T. In International Encyclopedia of Ethics, pages 1–9. American Cancer Society, 2017. ![Good and Good-for [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex In philosophy, there is a long tradition of treating as two separate inquiries the questions “What things are good, period?” and “What things are good for us (either in general or for some particular person)?” The former involves what has generally been considered an impersonal, moral, nonrelational value, the latter a personal (prudential or subjective) relational value: a “value for someone.” Just how far back the tradition stretches remains to be examined, though. For instance, it is still a matter of interpretation whether ancient Greek philosophy acknowledged the two varieties of good. In this essay focus is on “good for” and how it relates to “good, period.” However, it should be stressed that philosophers distinguish between several other kinds of good.
@incollection{ronnowrasmussen_good_2017,
title = {Good and {Good}-for},
copyright = {Copyright © 2017 John Wiley \& Sons, Ltd},
isbn = {978-1-4443-6707-2},
url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee386.pub2},
abstract = {In philosophy, there is a long tradition of treating as two separate inquiries the questions “What things are good, period?” and “What things are good for us (either in general or for some particular person)?” The former involves what has generally been considered an impersonal, moral, nonrelational value, the latter a personal (prudential or subjective) relational value: a “value for someone.” Just how far back the tradition stretches remains to be examined, though. For instance, it is still a matter of interpretation whether ancient Greek philosophy acknowledged the two varieties of good. In this essay focus is on “good for” and how it relates to “good, period.” However, it should be stressed that philosophers distinguish between several other kinds of good.},
language = {en},
urldate = {2018-06-24},
booktitle = {International {Encyclopedia} of {Ethics}},
publisher = {American Cancer Society},
author = {Rønnow‐Rasmussen, Toni},
year = {2017},
doi = {10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee386.pub2},
keywords = {monism, nonrelational good},
pages = {1--9},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"NyFita7oLXSxbpLFh","bibbaseid":"rnnowrasmussen-goodandgoodfor-2017","author_short":["Rønnow‐Rasmussen, T."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"incollection","type":"incollection","title":"Good and Good-for","copyright":"Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd","isbn":"978-1-4443-6707-2","url":"http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee386.pub2","abstract":"In philosophy, there is a long tradition of treating as two separate inquiries the questions “What things are good, period?” and “What things are good for us (either in general or for some particular person)?” The former involves what has generally been considered an impersonal, moral, nonrelational value, the latter a personal (prudential or subjective) relational value: a “value for someone.” Just how far back the tradition stretches remains to be examined, though. For instance, it is still a matter of interpretation whether ancient Greek philosophy acknowledged the two varieties of good. In this essay focus is on “good for” and how it relates to “good, period.” However, it should be stressed that philosophers distinguish between several other kinds of good.","language":"en","urldate":"2018-06-24","booktitle":"International Encyclopedia of Ethics","publisher":"American Cancer Society","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Rønnow‐Rasmussen"],"firstnames":["Toni"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2017","doi":"10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee386.pub2","keywords":"monism, nonrelational good","pages":"1–9","bibtex":"@incollection{ronnowrasmussen_good_2017,\n\ttitle = {Good and {Good}-for},\n\tcopyright = {Copyright © 2017 John Wiley \\& Sons, Ltd},\n\tisbn = {978-1-4443-6707-2},\n\turl = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee386.pub2},\n\tabstract = {In philosophy, there is a long tradition of treating as two separate inquiries the questions “What things are good, period?” and “What things are good for us (either in general or for some particular person)?” The former involves what has generally been considered an impersonal, moral, nonrelational value, the latter a personal (prudential or subjective) relational value: a “value for someone.” Just how far back the tradition stretches remains to be examined, though. For instance, it is still a matter of interpretation whether ancient Greek philosophy acknowledged the two varieties of good. In this essay focus is on “good for” and how it relates to “good, period.” However, it should be stressed that philosophers distinguish between several other kinds of good.},\n\tlanguage = {en},\n\turldate = {2018-06-24},\n\tbooktitle = {International {Encyclopedia} of {Ethics}},\n\tpublisher = {American Cancer Society},\n\tauthor = {Rønnow‐Rasmussen, Toni},\n\tyear = {2017},\n\tdoi = {10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee386.pub2},\n\tkeywords = {monism, nonrelational good},\n\tpages = {1--9},\n}\n\n\n\n","author_short":["Rønnow‐Rasmussen, T."],"key":"ronnowrasmussen_good_2017","id":"ronnowrasmussen_good_2017","bibbaseid":"rnnowrasmussen-goodandgoodfor-2017","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee386.pub2"},"keyword":["monism","nonrelational good"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"downloads":0,"html":""},"bibtype":"incollection","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero/daniel.r","dataSources":["bMNYYYE8ALPmpK328"],"keywords":["monism","nonrelational good"],"search_terms":["good","good","rønnow‐rasmussen"],"title":"Good and Good-for","year":2017}