Thinking Morality Interpersonally: A Reply to Burgess-Jackson

Hypatia 8 (3):167-173 (1993)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In a comment on my paper "Feminism, Ethics, and the Question of Theory", Keith Burgess-Jackson argues that I have misdiagnosed the problem with modern moral theory. Burgess-Jackson misunderstands both the illustrative-"theoretical-juridical"-model I constructed there and how my critique and alternative model answer to specifically feminist concerns. Ironically, his own view seems to reproduce the very conception of morality as an individually internalized action-guiding code of principles that my earlier essay argued is the conception central to modern moral theories

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

John Stuart Mill, Radical Feminist.Keith Burgess-Jackson - 1995 - Social Theory and Practice 21 (3):369-396.
Deontological Egoism.Keith Burgess-Jackson - 2003 - Social Theory and Practice 29 (3):357-385.
Economic Justice. [REVIEW]Keith Burgess-Jackson - 1999 - Social Theory and Practice 25 (2):337-343.
Philosophical Ethics. [REVIEW]Keith Burgess-Jackson - 2002 - Teaching Philosophy 25 (3):251-254.
Think. [REVIEW]Keith Burgess-Jackson - 2001 - Teaching Philosophy 24 (1):105-109.
Do Physicians Kill Patients? An Essay on Arrogant Philosophy.Keith Burgess-Jackson - 1999 - Journal of Medical Humanities 20 (4):265-282.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-05-29

Downloads
33 (#470,805)

6 months
4 (#818,853)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations