Reasonable Reasons in Contractualist Moral Argument*
نویسنده
چکیده
A plausible philosophical characterization of moral reasoning need not be an oracle for the resolution of difficult moral questions for it to be a significant influence in how a person deliberates about such questions. Reflection upon a particular account may, for instance, have consequences for a person’s standing judgments concerning the kinds of consideration that are relevant for thinking about moral problems. She may conclude that some of her views are mistaken, while coming to appreciate the relevance of kinds of considerations whose relevance she had been overlooking. A person may also develop a deeper understanding both of the interaction between morally relevant considerations and of why certain kinds of consideration are morally relevant at all. That a plausible characterization of moral reasoning have implications of this kind is a reasonable expectation to have of it, insofar as it wants to claim relevance for itself concerning how a person ought to deliberate about substantive moral questions. Scanlonian contractualism offers a distinctive proposal for how best to characterize that aspect of moral reasoning concerned with principles that are to serve as standards of interpersonal criticism and as guides to deliberation to which persons are entitled to hold one another accountable. They are so entitled as a matter of respect for one another’s value as a person. The proposal is that reasoning about such principles is best characterized by the question of whether or not a particular proposed principle for the general regulation of a certain kind of sit-
منابع مشابه
Moral Responsibility
Introduction General Overviews Anthologies and Textbooks Free Will Classic Texts Contemporary Debates and their Precursors (I) Utilitarian Instrumentalism (II) Responsibility and the Reactive Sentiments (III) Identifying with our Actions (IV) The Value of Choice and Contractualist Developments Moral Reasons and Moral Address Arguments Against Control Earlier Contributions Social and Political A...
متن کاملDrugs, Morality and the Law
Arguments for and against the legal prohibition of drugs are surveyed. Various kinds of argument are identified and analysed: arguments against prohibition from a moral right to personal liberty; utilitarian and contractualist arguments for a right to personal liberty; arguments for prohibition from liberty-limiting principles (the harm principle, legal paternalism, legal moralism, Kan...
متن کاملReasons, rational requirements, and the putative pseudo-question "Why be moral?"
In this paper, I challenge a well-known argument for the view that “Why be moral?” is a pseudo-question. I do so by refuting a component of that argument, a component that is not only crucial to the argument but important in its own right. That component concerns the status ofmoral reasons in replies to “Why bemoral?”; consequently, this paper concerns reasons and rationality no less than it co...
متن کاملConsciousness and the Moral Permissibility of Infanticide
In this paper, we present a conditional argument for the moral permissibility of some kinds of infanticide. The argument is based on a certain view of consciousness and the claim that there is an intimate connection between consciousness and infanticide. In bare outline, the argument is this: it is impermissible to intentionally kill a creature only if the creature is conscious; it is reasonabl...
متن کامل