Deliberation About the Good: Justifying What We Have
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
This dissertation advances a theory of deliberation about the goals, projects and values that constitute a good or worthwhile life for a person. The central argument begins with the assumption that the concerns most people have in this kind of deliberation are to discover which goals are worth pursuing, or which ends worth valuing, given those features of ourselves that we find important on reflection, and choose our goals and values in such a way that our choices can bear our reflective scrutiny. The author's strategy is to argue first for an analysis of what it is to value, and second for standards of justification that govern rational valuing. Her account of valuing is novel in its emphasis on the importance of stability in a reflective pattern of motivational states. This account explains the motivational forces our values seem to have while avoiding the traps of other motivational accounts. The author then articulates standards for ideal deliberation and argues that the best way to approximate this ideal is by developing virtues of deliberation. Her insightful discussions of some particular virtues of deliberation persuade the reader that understanding good deliberation as a matter of developing virtues rather than following rules is a promising approach, which has been neglected in recent moral philosophy. The case for the author's own view is enriched and supported by critical discussions of competing theories of justification and valuing. Careful and illuminating discussions of contemporary philosophers such as Richard Brandt, Gerald Gaus, David Schmidtz, Elizabeth Anderson and Michael Smith are included.
|Keywords||Decision making Moral and ethical aspects Values|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$145.00 direct from Amazon $145.00 new $1108.45 used Amazon page|
|Call number||BJ1419.T53 2000|
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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
R. Jerrold Coombs (1997). In Defense of Israel Scheffler's Conception of Moral Education. Studies in Philosophy and Education 16 (1/2):175-187.
Elizabeth Anderson (2005). Moral Heuristics: Rigid Rules or Flexible Inputs in Moral Deliberation? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):544-545.
Klas Roth (2011). Good Will: Cosmopolitan Education as a Site for Deliberation. Educational Philosophy and Theory 43 (3):298-312.
Shane Ralston (2010). Dewey and Goodin on the Value of Monological Deliberation. Etica E Politica 12 (1):235-255.
Bennett W. Helm (2000). Emotional Reason How to Deliberate About Value. American Philosophical Quarterly 37 (1):1-22.
Diego Gracia (2003). Ethical Case Deliberation and Decision Making. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 6 (3):227-233.
Jennifer M. Morton (2011). Toward an Ecological Theory of the Norms of Practical Deliberation. European Journal of Philosophy 19 (4):561-584.
Isaac Levi (1986). Hard Choices: Decision Making Under Unresolved Conflict. Cambridge University Press.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?