Rejecting ethical deflationism

Ethics 116 (4):742-768 (2006)

Authors
Jake Ross
Illinois State University
Abstract
One of the perennial challenges of ethical theory has been to provide an answer to a number of views that appear to undermine the importance of ethical questions. We may refer to such views collectively as “deflationary ethical theories.” These include theories, such as nihilism, according to which no action is better than any other, as well as relativistic theories according to which no ethical theory is better than any other. In this article I present a new response to such deflationary ethical views. Drawing a distinction between acceptance and rejection, on the one hand, and belief and disbelief, on the other, I argue that we have strong reason to reject these theories, even if we do not have reason to disbelieve them. In Section I, I clarify the question of what ethical theory we should accept, and I argue for the central importance of this question. In Section II, I discuss what I call “absolutely deflationary” ethical theories. These are theories according to which it matters not at all what we do or not at all what ethical theory we accept. I argue that it is generally rational to reject any theory of this kind. In Section III, I discuss what I call “relatively deflationary” ethical theories. These are theories according to which it matters little what we do or what ethical theory we accept. I argue that we have strong pro tanto reason to reject theories of this kind. And then, in Sections IV and V, I reply to some common objections to my arguments. Throughout, I will be arguing not that deflationary ethical theories are false but only that we should reject them from the practical point of view as a basis for guiding our actions.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/505234
Options
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: 42,938
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

If Nothing Matters.Guy Kahane - 2017 - Noûs 51 (2):327-353.
A Case for Ethical Veganism.Tristram McPherson - 2014 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 11 (6):677-703.
Decision-Making Under Moral Uncertainty.Andrew Sepielli - forthcoming - In Karen Jones, Mark C. Timmons & Aaron Zimmerman (eds.), Routledge Handbook on Moral Epistemology.

View all 39 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Glory as an Ethical Idea.Timothy Chappell - 2011 - Philosophical Investigations 34 (2):105-134.
Ethical Theories and Moral Guidance.Pekka Väyrynen - 2006 - Utilitas 18 (3):291-309.
Reliabilism and Deflationism.James R. Beebe - 2006 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84 (4):495 – 510.
The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory.David Copp (ed.) - 2005 - Oxford University Press.
Expressivism, Deflationism and Correspondence.Patricia Marino - 2005 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 2 (2):171-191.
Ethical Relativism and Universalism.Saral Jhingran - 2001 - Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.
Is Virtue Ethics Self-Effacing?Joel A. Martinez - 2011 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (2):277-288.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
191 ( #37,476 of 2,259,433 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
7 ( #212,334 of 2,259,433 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature