Graduate studies at Western
Philosophy 78 (3):355-368 (2003)
|Abstract||Gilbert Harman and John Doris (among others) have maintained that experimental studies of human behaviour give good grounds for denying the very existence of moral character. This research, according to Harman and Doris, shows human behaviour to be dependent not on character but mainly on one's ‘situation.’ My paper develops a number of criticisms of this view, among them that social science experiments are ill-suited to study character, insofar as they do not estimate the role of character in continuously shaping the direction of one's life—including what situations one is apt to get into in the first place.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
John M. Doris (2002). Lack of Character: Personality and Moral Behavior. Cambridge University Press.
Gopal Sreenivasan (2002). Errors About Errors: Virtue Theory and Trait Attribution. Mind 111 (441):47-68.
Steven M. Samuels & William D. Casebeer (2005). A Social Psychological View of Morality: Why Knowledge of Situational Influences on Behaviour Can Improve Character Development Practices. Journal of Moral Education 34 (1):73-87.
Joel J. Kupperman (2001). The Indispensability of Character. Philosophy 76 (2):239-250.
Laurence Thomas (1989). Living Morally: A Psychology of Moral Character. Temple University Press.
Gilbert Harman (2003). No Character or Personality. Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (1):87-94.
Joel Kupperman (1991). Character. Oxford University Press.
Gilbert Harman (1999). Moral Philosophy Meets Social Psychology: Virtue Ethics and the Fundamental Attribution Error. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 99 (1999):315 - 331.
Erik J. Wielenberg (2006). Saving Character. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 9 (4):461 - 491.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads31 ( #44,929 of 740,104 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,960 of 740,104 )
How can I increase my downloads?