Journal of Ethics 6 (1):21-42 (2002)
What makes an ``ought'''' claim authoritative? What makes aparticular norm genuinely reason-giving for an agent? This paper arguesthat normative authority can best be accounted for in terms of thejustification of norms. The main obstacle to such a theory, however, isa regress problem. The worry is that every attempt to offer ajustification for an ``ought'''' claim must appeal to another ``ought''''claim, ad infinitum. The paper argues that vicious regress canbe avoided in practical reasoning in the same way coherentists avoid theproblem in epistemology. Norms are justified by their coherence withother norms.
|Keywords||authority coherentism justification normativity norms|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Three Conceptions of Practical Authority.Daniel Star & Candice Delmas - 2011 - Jurisprudence: An International Journal of Legal and Political Thought 2 (1):143-160.
Assessing Law's Claim to Authority.Bas van der Vossen - 2011 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 31 (3):481-501.
Normative Authority for Empirical Science.Wim de Muijnck - 2011 - Philosophical Explorations 14 (3):263-275.
The Problem of Normative Authority in Kant, Hegel, and Nietzsche.Paul Katsafanas - 2017 - In Tom Bailey & João Constâncio (eds.), Nietzsche’s Engagements with Kant, Volume I: Ethics. Bloomsbury.
Justification and the Authority of Norms.Linda Radzik - 2000 - Journal of Value Inquiry 34 (4):451-461.
Incorrigible Norms: Foundationalist Theories of Normative Authority.Linda Radzik - 2000 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 38 (4):633-649.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads56 ( #93,639 of 2,169,644 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #186,189 of 2,169,644 )
How can I increase my downloads?