Scanlon, permissions, and redundancy: response to McNaughton and Rawling
According to one formulation of Scanlon ’s contractualist principle, certain acts are wrong if they are permitted by principles that are reasonably rejectable because they permit such acts. According to the redundancy objection, if a principle is reasonably rejectable because it permits actions which have feature F, such actions are wrong simply in virtue of having F and not because their having F makes principles permitting them reasonably rejectable. Consequently Scanlon ’s contractualist principle adds nothing to the reasons we have not to act wrongly and is redundant. In ‘ Scanlon ’s contractualism and the redundancy objection’ I argued that the redundancy objection is based upon the false assumption that Scanlon regards his contractualist principle as a ground of moral wrongness – that is, as telling us what makes certain acts wrong. I pointed out that he does not regard his principle in this way, but regards it as telling us what moral wrongness is. So the redundancy objection is based on a mistake. Nonetheless, Scanlon is still vulnerable to a version of this objection because he regards the moral wrongness of j ing as a reason not to j. Given that he identiﬁes the fact that j ing is wrong with the fact that j ing is permitted by a reasonably rejectable principle, he is committed to the view that his contractualist principle gives us a reason not to j. His critics can thus still insist that the only reason we have not to do such acts is provided.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
Scanlon, Permissions, and Redundancy: Response to McNaughton and Rawling.Philip Stratton-Lake - 2003 - Analysis 63 (4):332–337.
Can Scanlon Avoid Redundancy by Passing the Buck?David McNaughton & Piers Rawling - 2003 - Analysis 63 (4):328–331.
A Novel Interpretation of Plato's Theory of Forms.P. X. Monaghan - 2010 - Metaphysica 11 (1):63-78.
Commodification or Compensation: A Reply to Ketchum.H. M. Malm - 1989 - Hypatia 4 (3):128-135.
Contractualist Replies to the Redundancy Objections.Jussi Suikkanen - 2005 - Theoria 71 (1):38-58.
Shifting Frames: From Divided to Distributed Psychologies of Scientific Agents.Peter J. Taylor - 1994 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:304-310.
The Contemporary Significance of Confucianism.Tang Yijie & Yan Xin - 2008 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (4):477-501.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads32 ( #156,415 of 2,152,002 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #398,812 of 2,152,002 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.