At first I posted in "German missing" because I was having trouble proofreading this English text, and thought I might be dealing with a strange translation from the German. related discussion: overdemandingness objection
Now I see that "demandingness objection" is apparently OK, --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Demandingnes...
-- but I am having problems with the logic of the text, which is a description of a research project in the field of philosophy.
"The project assesses the truth of the Overdemandingness Objection. The Objection claims that the consequentialist requirement that the right action is what produces the best results, is so demanding that it is unacceptable. The project is based on the idea that the best way to advocate
the Objection is to hold that consequentialist requirements are inescapable
because consequentialist reasons for action override their non-moral counterparts. This basic idea singles out three tasks. To advocate
the Objection it must be shown that moral reasons exist necessarily, that they are of the consequentialist kind, and that they override non-moral reasons. To respond to
the Objection at least one of these three claims must be denied
Wouldn't that actually "advocate" the consequentialist theory, rather than "the Objection" to the theory? Is "respond to" the right phrase -- I mean, even if the subjects of the sentences were switched? One more question: "denied" or "disproven"?
I might be suffering from caffeine deficiency. :) Don't know why I can't get my mind around the text as written. I'd be grateful for opinions or suggestions!