David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (1):81-97 (2007)
Liberal societies are characterized by respect for a fundamental value pluralism; i.e., respect for individuals’ rights to live by their own conception of the good. Still, the state must make decisions that privilege some values at the cost of others. When public ethics committees give substantial ethical advice on policy related issues, it is therefore important that this advice is well justified. The use of explicit tools for ethical assessment can contribute to justifying advice. In this article, I will discuss one approach to ethical assessment, the ethical matrix method. This method is a variant of intuitionist balancing. Intuitionism is characterized by stressing the existence of several (at least two) fundamental prima facie moral principles, between which there is no given rank order. For some intuitionist approaches, coherentism has been proposed as a model of justification. This article will discuss justification of ethical advice and evaluate the appropriateness of coherentism as a justificatory approach to intuitionist tools.
|Keywords||coherentism ethical matrix ethical tools intuitionist balancing justification prima facie principles value pluralism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Daniel Gregorowius, Petra Lindemann-Matthies & Markus Huppenbauer (2012). Ethical Discourse on the Use of Genetically Modified Crops: A Review of Academic Publications in the Fields of Ecology and Environmental Ethics. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (3):265-293.
Steven P. McCulloch (2013). A Critique of FAWC's Five Freedoms as a Framework for the Analysis of Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (5):959-975.
Subodh Kulkarni & Nagarajan Ramamoorthy (2014). Intra‐Firm Transfer of Best Practices in Moral Reasoning: A Conceptual Framework. Business Ethics: A European Review 23 (1):15-33.
Similar books and articles
T. Shogenji (2001). The Role of Coherence in Epistemic Justification. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 79 (1):90 – 106.
Philip J. Ivanhoe (2009). Pluralism, Toleration, and Ethical Promiscuity. Journal of Religious Ethics 37 (2):311-329.
Richard F. Kitchener (1991). The Ethical Foundations of Behavior Therapy. Ethics and Behavior 1 (4):221 – 238.
Donnie J. Self (1985). An Analysis of the Structure of Justification of Ethical Decisions in Medical Intervention. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 6 (3).
Kate Millar, Erik Thorstensen, Sandy Tomkins, Ben Mepham & Matthias Kaiser (2007). Developing the Ethical Delphi. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (1):53-63.
Mylan Engel Jr (2012). Coherentism and the Epistemic Justification of Moral Beliefs: A Case Study in How to Do Practical Ethics Without Appeal to a Moral Theory. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (1):50-74.
Eric Wiland (2000). Good Advice and Rational Action. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60 (3):561-569.
Michael Cholbi (2007). Moral Expertise and the Credentials Problem. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (4):323-334.
Barbara Robin Mescher (2008). The Business of Commercial Legal Advice and the Ethical Implications for Lawyers and Their Clients. Journal of Business Ethics 81 (4):913 - 926.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads20 ( #71,683 of 1,088,831 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,665 of 1,088,831 )
How can I increase my downloads?