Challenge and Response
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Carbondale,Southern Illinois University Press (1971)
Mr. Wellman’s highly original contribution to the relatively new field of justification in ethics consists of characterizing the different ways in which ethical statements can be challenged and showing how each sort of challenge can be met by an appropriate response, enabling reasonable men to appropriately discuss or reflect on ethical issues. In developing his unique, systematic, methodology of ethics, Mr. Wellman has, first, rigorously reviewed and refuted the main arguments for the view of the nature of all reasoning as deductive and, second, convincingly presented arguments for the existence of nondeductive evidences in ethics. Mr. Wellman’s broad definition of reasoning and his rejection of the identification of justification with reasoning reveals new dimensions of justification which will have wide implications in other areas of human speculation.
|Keywords||Judgment (Ethics Reasoning Values|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$5.61 used (72% off) $89.96 new Amazon page|
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
Floris Bex & Bart Verheij (2012). Solving a Murder Case by Asking Critical Questions: An Approach to Fact-Finding in Terms of Argumentation and Story Schemes. [REVIEW] Argumentation 26 (3):325-353.
Jan Albert Laar (2013). J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson (Eds): Conductive Argument: An Overlooked Type of Defeasible Reasoning. [REVIEW] Argumentation 27 (3):337-344.
Jonathan Adler (2013). Are Conductive Arguments Possible? Argumentation 27 (3):245-257.
Steven Sverdlik (1985). Counterexamples in Ethics. Metaphilosophy 16 (2‐3):130-145.
James B. Freeman (2012). J. Anthony Blair (2012): Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation. [REVIEW] Argumentation 26 (4):505-527.
Similar books and articles
Robert Audi (1989). Practical Reasoning. Routledge.
Henry Jack (1972). Challenge and Response: Justification in Ethics, By Carl Wellman. Carbondale: Southern Illinois Press: Carbondale and Edwardsville. 1971. Pp. Xii, 295. $8.95. [REVIEW] Dialogue 11 (01):137-140.
Mohammad J. Abdolmohammadi & C. Richard Baker (2006). Accountants' Value Preferences and Moral Reasoning. Journal of Business Ethics 69 (1):11 - 25.
Cordelia Fine (2006). Is the Emotional Dog Wagging its Rational Tail, or Chasing It? Philosophical Explorations 9 (1):83 – 98.
Roberto Frega (2012). Practice, Judgment, and the Challenge of Moral and Political Disagreement: A Pragmatist Account. Lexington Books.
Hanno Sauer (2011). Social Intuitionism and the Psychology of Moral Reasoning. Philosophy Compass 6 (10):708-721.
James Weber & Sharon Green (1991). Principled Moral Reasoning: Is It a Viable Approach to Promote Ethical Integrity? [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 10 (5):325 - 333.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?