Graduate studies at Western
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):55-68 (2009)
|Abstract||The idea of moral reform requires that morality be more than a description of what people do value, for there has to be some measure against which to assess progress. Otherwise, any change is not reform, but simply difference. Therefore, I discuss moral reform in relation to two prescriptive approaches to common morality, which I distinguish as the foundational and the pragmatic. A foundational approach to common morality (e.g., Bernard Gert’s) suggests that there is no reform of morality , but of beliefs, values, customs, and practices so as to conform with an unchanging, foundational morality. If, however, there were revision in its foundation (e.g., in rationality), then reform in morality itself would be possible. On a pragmatic view, on the other hand, common morality is relative to human flourishing, and its justification consists in its effectiveness in promoting flourishing. Morality is dependent on what in fact does promote human flourishing and therefore, could be reformed. However, a pragmatic approach, which appears more open to the possibility of moral reform, would need a more robust account of norms by which reform is measured.|
|Keywords||Morality Common morality Moral reform Gert Beauchamp Childress Foundational Pragmatic Pragmatism Ethics|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Mark J. Cherry (ed.) (2004). Natural Law and the Possibility of a Global Ethics. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Carson Strong (2008). Justifying Group-Specific Common Morality. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (1):1-15.
John D. Arras (2009). The Hedgehog and the Borg: Common Morality in Bioethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):11-30.
Bernard Gert (2004). Common Morality: Deciding What to Do. Oxford University Press.
Tom L. Beauchamp (2003). A Defense of the Common Morality. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (3):259-274.
Oliver Rauprich (2008). Common Morality: Comment on Beauchamp and Childress. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (1):43-71.
Andrew Alexandra & Seumas Miller (2009). Ethical Theory, “Common Morality,” and Professional Obligations. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):69-80.
Bernard Gert (1999). Common Morality and Computing. Ethics and Information Technology 1 (1):53-60.
Leigh Turner (2003). Zones of Consensus and Zones of Conflict: Questioning the "Common Morality" Presumption in Bioethics. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (3):193-218.
Ronald A. Lindsay (2005). Slaves, Embryos, and Nonhuman Animals: Moral Status and the Limitations of Common Morality Theory. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 15 (4):323-346.
Added to index2009-02-14
Total downloads22 ( #62,772 of 739,396 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,396 )
How can I increase my downloads?