This is in contrast to consequentialism as a part/tool of other moral systems
If there is a deotological rule don’t murder, then the question becomes, what makes an action murder.
Murder is when you kill someone. (Obviously).
That is, murder is an action with the consequence of death (to rounding)
So there is a sense in which consequentialism is also for saying which actions fall into which categories in some other moral framework.
I retract.
“What actions are what” is a question only a consequentialist would ask (consequentialism grows out of the ontology of figuring out the consequences of actions).
Other moral systems can/do exist in ontologies where you do not believe that is possible, or do not trust that it is possible to be good at that, and so judge on other grounds.
You are right.
I had an interesting conversation about this.
This is in contrast to consequentialism as a part/tool of other moral systems
If there is a deotological rule don’t murder, then the question becomes, what makes an action murder.
Murder is when you kill someone. (Obviously).
That is, murder is an action with the consequence of death (to rounding)
So there is a sense in which consequentialism is also for saying which actions fall into which categories in some other moral framework.
I retract.
“What actions are what” is a question only a consequentialist would ask (consequentialism grows out of the ontology of figuring out the consequences of actions).
Other moral systems can/do exist in ontologies where you do not believe that is possible, or do not trust that it is possible to be good at that, and so judge on other grounds.