Authors
David Sackris
Arapahoe Community College
Abstract
I argue that the debate concerning the nature of first-person moral judgment, namely, whether such moral judgments are inherently motivating or whether moral judgments can be made in the absence of motivation, may be founded on a faulty assumption: that moral judgments form a distinct kind that must have some shared, essential features in regards to motivation to act. I argue that there is little reason to suppose that first-person moral judgments form a homogenous class in this respect by considering an ordinary case: student readers of Peter Singer’s “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”. Neither internalists nor externalists can provide a satisfying account as to why our students fail to act in this particular case, but are motivated to act by their moral judgments in most cases. I argue that the inability to provide a satisfying account is rooted in this shared assumption about the nature of moral judgments. Once we consider rejecting the notion that first-person moral decision- making forms a distinct kind in the way it is typically assumed, the internalist/externalist debate may be rendered moot.
Keywords Meta-ethics  internalism  externalism
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.31820/ejap.17.2.1
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
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

The Moral Problem.Michael Smith (ed.) - 1994 - Wiley.
Famine, Affluence, and Morality.Peter Singer - 1972 - Oxford University Press USA.
Famine, Affluence, and Morality.Peter Singer - 1972 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (3):229-243.

View all 65 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Famine, Affluence, and Philosophers’ Biases.Peter Seipel - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 177 (10):2907-2926.
Life on a Small Planet.Charles E. Reagan - 1969 - Philosophical Studies (Dublin) 18:297-298.
Life on a Small Planet. [REVIEW]Charles E. Reagan - 1969 - Philosophical Studies (Dublin) 18:297-298.
Famine, Affluence, and Morality.Peter Singer - 1972 - Oxford University Press USA.
Reflections of a Philosopher.Thad Botham - 2012 - In What Might Be: Readings in Philosophy. Dubuque, USA: Kendall Hunt. pp. 307-321.
Peter Singer on Famine, Affluence, and Morality: A Christian Response.J. S. Spoerl - 1992 - American Journal of Jurisprudence 37 (1):113-133.
Amorality.Dale Dorsey - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (2):329-342.
An Amoral Manifesto Part I.Joel Marks - 2010 - Philosophy Now (80):30-33.
An Amoral Manifesto Part II.Joel Marks - 2010 - Philosophy Now (81):23-26.
Moral Realism and Moral Judgments.Frederik Kaufman - 1992 - Erkenntnis 36 (1):103 - 112.
Famine Ethics.Olivier Rubin - 2019 - Food Ethics 4 (2):123-138.
Moral Judgment and the Content-Attitude Distinction.Uriah Kriegel - 2021 - Philosophical Studies 179 (4):1135-1152.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-10-01

Total views
64 ( #180,577 of 2,519,870 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
38 ( #22,782 of 2,519,870 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes