Knowledge of Objective 'Oughts': Monotonicity and the New Miners Puzzle


Authors
Jack Spencer
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Daniel Muñoz
Monash University
Abstract
In the classic Miners case, an agent subjectively ought to do what they know is objectively wrong. This case shows that the subjective and objective ‘oughts’ are somewhat independent. But there remains a powerful intuition that the guidance of objective ‘oughts’ is more authoritative—so long as we know what they tell us. We argue that this intuition must be given up in light of a monotonicity principle, which undercuts the rationale for saying that objective ‘oughts’ are an authoritative guide for agents and advisors.
Keywords ought  subjective ought  objective ought  rationality  miners  objective reasons  subjective reasons  advice  normativity
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/phpr.12702
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
External links

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

Moral Dimensions: Permissibility, Meaning, Blame.Thomas Scanlon - 2008 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
On What Matters: Two-Volume Set.Derek Parfit - 2011 - Oxford University Press.
Ifs and Oughts.Niko Kolodny & John MacFarlane - 2010 - Journal of Philosophy 107 (3):115-143.
Being More Realistic About Reasons: On Rationality and Reasons Perspectivism.Clayton Littlejohn - 2019 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 99 (3):605-627.

View all 28 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Objective Oughts and a Puzzle About Futurity.Marra Alessandra - 2016 - In Olivier Roy, Allard Tamminga & Malte Willer (eds.), Deontic Logic and Normative Systems. College Publications. pp. 171-186.
An Objectivist’s Guide to Subjective Reasons.Daniel Wodak - 2019 - Res Philosophica 96 (2):229-244.
Keep Things in Perspective: Reasons, Rationality, and the A Priori.Daniel Whiting - 2014 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 8 (1):1-22.
Subjective Reasons.Eric Vogelstein - 2012 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (2):239-257.
The Case of the Miners.Vuko Andric - 2012 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy (1):1-8.
Friendship and Reasons of Intimacy.Diane Jeske - 2001 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (2):329-346.
Friendship and Reasons of Intimacy.Diane Jeske - 2001 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (2):329-346.
Objective or Subjective 'Ought'?Sven Ove Hansson - 2010 - Utilitas 22 (1):33-35.
Subjective Rightness.Holly M. Smith - 2010 - Social Philosophy and Policy 27 (2):64-110.
Can Objectivists Account for Subjective Reasons?Daniel Wodak - 2017 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 12 (3):259-279.
Reasons of Love: Response to Wolf.Cheshire Calhoun - 2016 - Foundations of Science 21 (2):275-277.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-04-21

Total views
250 ( #29,456 of 2,311,308 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
250 ( #1,557 of 2,311,308 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature