David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 132 (2):191 - 210 (2007)
I give the label “ethical pluralism” to the meta-ethical view that competing moral views are valid. I assume that validity is conferred on a moral view by its satisfying the relevant meta-ethical criteria in a maximally satisfactory way. If the relevant meta-ethical criteria are based on something roughly like the wide reflective equilibrium model, then ethical pluralism is likely to be correct. Traditional moral views do not grant exemptions from their own binding rules or principles to agents – should any exist – who adhere to a competing valid moral view. Given the usual conception of accepting a moral view, an ethical pluralist cannot honestly accept a traditional moral view. Consequently, I argue, an ethical pluralist is committed to the view that all traditional moral views are invalid. Given the likelihood of ethical pluralism, this conclusion is alarming. I set forth a weak conception of accepting a moral view that is designed to allow an ethical pluralist honestly to accept a traditional moral view. In particular, my conception is designed to explain how someone can (a) be guided by the view that she accepts; (b) accept her own moral view while rationally not accepting competing views that she thinks are equally valid; and (c) not be prepared to prescribe morally to those who are following other valid views. Central to my formulation are what I call a stance of modest respectful disapproval toward other people’s wrong behavior, together with acceptance of decisive moral reasons for oneself that are generated by the valid moral view that one accepts.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy of Religion Philosophy of Mind Epistemology Logic Philosophy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Gian Luca Casali (2011). Developing a Multidimensional Scale for Ethical Decision Making. Journal of Business Ethics 104 (4):485-497.
Similar books and articles
Lawrence Torcello (2011). Sophism and Moral Agnosticism, or, How to Tell a Relativist From a Pluralist. The Pluralist 6 (1):87-108.
Robert B. Talisse (2011). Value Pluralism and Liberal Politics. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (1):87-100.
Torbjörn Tännsjö (1987). Moral Doubts About Strict Materialism. Inquiry 30 (4):451-458.
Garrett Cullity (1999). Virtue Ethics, Theory, and Warrant. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2 (3):277-294.
Felix E. Oppenheim (1998). The Subjectivity of Moral Judgements: A Defence. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 1 (4):42-61.
Joakim Sandberg (2007). Should I Invest with My Conscience? Business Ethics: A European Review 16 (1):71–86.
John R. Wright (2006). Moral Discourse, Pluralism, and Moral Cognitivism. Metaphilosophy 37 (1):92–111.
J. Baird Callicott (1990). The Case Against Moral Pluralism. Environmental Ethics 12 (2):99-124.
Brenda Cohen (1983). Ethical Objectivity and Moral Education. Journal of Moral Education 12 (2):131-136.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads16 ( #118,499 of 1,679,365 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #183,761 of 1,679,365 )
How can I increase my downloads?