Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T20:35:17.264Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In Defence of Saints and Heroes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2009

Lorenne M. Burchill
Lorenne M. Burchill
Affiliation:
Somerville College, Oxford.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Discussion
Information
Philosophy , Volume 40 , Issue 152 , April 1965 , pp. 152 - 157
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 152 note 1 Chopra, Y., ‘Professor Urmson on Saints and Heroes’, Philosophy XXXVIII: 144, April 1963, pp. 160–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 152 note 2 Urmson, J. O. ‘Saints and Heroes’, Essays in Moral Philosophy, (ed.) Melden, A. I., Seattle, , Wash.: U. of Wash. Press, 1958, pp. 198–216.Google Scholar

page 152 note 3 Ibid., p.198.

page 152 note 4 Chopra, , op. cit., p. 161.Google Scholar

page 152 note 5 Ibid., p.163.

page 152 note 6 Chisholm, R. M., ‘Supererogation and Offence: A Conceptual Scheme of Ethics’, Ratio, 5: 1, 06 1963, pp. 1–14. 1 am indebted toj. O. Urmson for having brought this article to my attention.Google Scholar

page 153 note 1 Chopra, , op. cit., p. 165.Google Scholar

page 153 note 2 Ibid.

page 154 note 1 Ibid.

page 157 note 1 I would like to thank Professor W. C. Kneale and Mr J. O. Urmson for having given so graciously and generously of their time to discuss this problem with me, and to apologise to Mr Urmson if I have attributed to him views which he does not hold.