16 found
Order:
See also
Patrick Clipsham
Winona State University
  1.  35
    What’s Left for the Companions in Guilt Argument?Patrick Clipsham - 2019 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 22 (1):137-151.
    Companions in guilt arguments respond to moral error theory by pointing out that its philosophical rationale mandates the rejection of all categorical normative reasons, including epistemic reasons. A number of philosophers have recently been engaging in a dialogue about the strength of this argumentative strategy and the significance of the criticisms that has been raised against it. In this paper, I identify a specific argument, which I dub the ‘bullet-biting response’ as a crucial element in some recent attacks on the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  2. Does Empirical Moral Psychology Rest on a Mistake?Patrick Clipsham - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 170 (2):215-233.
    Many philosophers assume that philosophical theories about the psychological nature of moral judgment can be confirmed or disconfirmed by the kind of evidence gathered by natural and social scientists (especially experimental psychologists and neuroscientists). I argue that this assumption is mistaken. For the most part, empirical evidence can do no work in these philosophical debates, as the metaphorical heavy-lifting is done by the pre-experimental assumptions that make it possible to apply empirical data to these philosophical debates. For the purpose of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  3.  20
    Is There a Distinct Metaphilosophical Companions in Guilt Argument ?Patrick Clipsham - forthcoming - Philosophia:1-16.
    Companions in guilt arguments are widespread in defenses of moral realism and criticisms of error theory. Recently, a number of philosophers have argued that the companions in guilt argument fails because it makes untenable assumptions about the existence of categorical epistemic reasons. In this article, I develop an alternative version of the companions in guilt argument that does not succumb to this criticism, as it begins with the claim that there is a presumptive case in favor of attributing a belief (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  4.  10
    Reasons and Refusals.Patrick Clipsham - 2012 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (1):105-118.
    Health-care professionals sometimes appeal to their own consciences in order to justify their exemption from professional duties. I argue that we can only understand the content of a conscientious refusal as either a claim about the psychological dispositions of the refusing professional or as a purely normative claim about the status of the action that is the object of the refusal. If we adopt the former view, we would still need to adjudicate these refusals in terms of the acceptability of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  5.  30
    An Anti-Commodification Defense of Veganism.Patrick Clipsham & Katy Fulfer - 2016 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 19 (3):285-300.
    We develop an anti-commodification defense of ethical veganism which holds that common defenses of ethical veganism can benefit from treating the commodification of non-human animals as a serious, distinct moral wrong. Drawing inspiration from Elizabeth Anderson’s account of commodification, we develop an account of commodification that identifies most uses of animals in developed countries as forms of problematic commodification. We then show that this position can make significant contributions to both welfarist defenses of ethical veganism and animal rights theories.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6.  7
    Reasons and Refusals: The Relevance of Moral Distress.Patrick Clipsham - 2012 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (1):105-118.
    Health-care professionals sometimes appeal to their own consciences in order to justify their exemption from professional duties. I argue that we can only understand the content of a conscientious refusal as either a claim about the psychological dispositions of the refusing professional or as a purely normative claim about the status of the action that is the object of the refusal. If we adopt the former view, we would still need to adjudicate these refusals in terms of the acceptability of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  7.  24
    Developing a Post-Prior Taxonomy of Ethical Sentences.Patrick Clipsham - 2015 - Philosophia 43 (3):801-820.
    The main guiding assumption of this paper is that there is need for a taxonomy of ethical sentences that does not overgenerate, yet can make useful contributions to debates about certain controversial sentences . After surveying the recent literature and concluding that no extant taxonomy that satisfies both of these conditions is available to us, I propose and explain a novel taxonomy which does satisfy them. I then defend my proposal from five potential objections.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8.  74
    Andrew F. Smith, A Critique of the Moral Defense of Vegetarianism. Reviewed By.Patrick Clipsham - 2016 - Philosophy in Review 36 (4):179-181.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  40
    Comparing Policies on Conscientious Refusals: A Feminist Perspective.Patrick Clipsham - 2013 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 6 (1):159-165.
    Given numerous ethical concerns with conscientious refusals by healthcare professionals, there is a need for detailed policies outlining the permissibility of conscientious refusals. I suggest that the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) and American Medical Association (AMA) policies are inadequate and that these associations have good reason to endorse more restrictive, more detailed policies regarding conscientious refusals, much like those endorsed by nursing associations.Health-care professionals sometimes refuse to participate in the administration of legal interventions because the administration of these interventions conflicts (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  18
    Comparing Policies on Conscientious Refusals: A Feminist Perspective.Patrick Clipsham - 2013 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 6 (1):159-165.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  63
    In Defense of Anti‐Archimedean Moral Realism: A Response to Recent Critics.Patrick Clipsham - 2013 - Metaphilosophy 44 (4):470-484.
    Ronald Dworkin famously argued that many putatively nonmoral metaethical theories can only be understood as being internal to the moral domain. If correct, this position, referred to as anti-archimedeanism, has profound implications for the methodology of metaethics. This is particularly true for skeptical metaethical theories. This article defends a version of anti-archimedeanism that is true to the spirit rather than the letter of Dworkin's original thesis from several recent objections. First, it addresses Kenneth Ehrenberg's recent attempt to demonstrate how certain (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12.  12
    Jeremy R. Garrett, Ed. , The Ethics of Animal Research: Exploring the Controversy . Reviewed By.Patrick Clipsham - 2015 - Philosophy in Review 35 (2):67-69.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  24
    Moral Fictionalism and Moral Reasons.Patrick Clipsham - unknown
    One major problem with moral discourse is that we tend treat moral utterances as if they represent propositions. But complex metaphysical problems arise when we try to describe the nature of the moral facts that correspond to these propositions. If moral facts do not exist, how can moralizers justify engagement in moral practice? One possibility is abolitionism; abandoning morality and growing out of our old habits. Another option that has been suggested is that morality be preserved as a useful fiction. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  8
    The Limits of Self-Effacement: A Reply to Wittwer.Patrick Clipsham - forthcoming - Philosophical Studies:1-20.
    This article is concerned with the interconnection between three arguments: the Moral Explanatory Dispensability Argument, the Epistemic Explanatory Dispensability Argument, and the Companions in Guilt Argument. Silvan Wittwer has recently argued that the Epistemic EDA is self-effacing, whereas the Moral EDA is not. This difference between them is then leveraged by Wittwer to establish that there is a significant disparity between these arguments and that this disparity undermines attempts to use the CGA as a means of refuting the Moral EDA. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15.  15
    Using Small-Group Discussion Activities to Create a More Inclusive Classroom.Patrick Clipsham - 2017 - American Association of Philosophy Teachers Studies in Pedagogy 3:109-128.
    This paper is meant to engage with philosophy teachers who are interested in creating a more inclusive environment by using small group discussion exercises. I begin this paper by describing the connections between the inclusive classroom and the collaborative classroom. I then articulate two learning goals that group discussion exercises can help students accomplish and define these learning goals as philosophical discovery and philosophical creation. Finally, I discuss a number of activities that encourage students to accomplish these learning goals in (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  22
    Zoopolis: A Political Theory of Animal RightsZoopolis: A Political Theory of Animal Rights, by Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.David Speetzen & Patrick Clipsham - 2014 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 7 (2):261-266.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark