Reasoning with moral conflicts

Noûs 37 (4):557–605 (2003)

John Horty
University of Maryland, College Park
Let us say that a normative conflict is a situation in which an agent ought to perform an action A, and also ought to perform an action B, but in which it is impossible for the agent to perform both A and B. Not all normative conflicts are moral conflicts, of course. It may be that the agent ought to perform the action A for reasons of personal generosity, but ought to perform the action B for reasons of prudence: perhaps A involves buying a lavish gift for a friend, while B involves depositing a certain amount of money in the bank. In general, our practical deliberation is shaped by a concern with a variety of morally neutral goods—not just generosity and prudence, but any number of others, such as etiquette, aesthetics, fun—many of which are capable of providing conflicting reasons for action. I mention these ancillary values in the present setting, however, only to put them aside. We will be concerned here, not with normative conflicts more generally, but precisely with moral conflicts—situations in which, even when our attention is restricted entirely to moral reasons for action, it is nevertheless true that an agent ought to do A and ought to do B, where it is impossible to do both.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1046/j.1468-0068.2003.00452.x
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 40,109
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Counterfactuals.David K. Lewis - 1973 - Blackwell.
Mortal Questions.Thomas Nagel - 1979 - Cambridge University Press.
Counterfactuals.D. Lewis - 1973 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 27 (4):403-405.
Moral Reasons.Jonathan Dancy - 1993 - Blackwell.

View all 54 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Deontic Logic.Paul McNamara - 2010 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
VI-BayesianExpressivism.Seth Yalcin - 2012 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 112 (2pt2):123-160.

View all 17 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Reasons for Action.Pamela Hieronymi - 2011 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 111 (3pt3):407-427.
Perform Your Best Option.Douglas W. Portmore - 2013 - Journal of Philosophy 110 (8):436-459.
‘Ought’, ‘Can’, and Practical Reasons.Clayton Littlejohn - 2009 - American Philosophical Quarterly 46 (4):363-73.


Added to PP index

Total views
145 ( #48,051 of 2,237,106 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
33 ( #19,196 of 2,237,106 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes

Sign in to use this feature