What Kind of Perspectivism?

According to perspectivism about moral obligation, our obligations are affected by our epistemic circumstances. But how exactly should this claim be understood? On Zimmerman’s “Prospective View,” perspectivism is spelled out as the thesis that an option is obligatory if and only if it maximizes what...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Kiesewetter, Benjamin (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Lade...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Veröffentlicht: Brill 2018
In: Journal of moral philosophy
Jahr: 2018, Band: 15, Heft: 4, Seiten: 415-443
weitere Schlagwörter:B Michael J. Zimmerman
B Perspectivism
B diachronic obligation
B oughts and reasons
B consequentializing
B objective vs. subjective ought
B Jackson cases
Online Zugang: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:According to perspectivism about moral obligation, our obligations are affected by our epistemic circumstances. But how exactly should this claim be understood? On Zimmerman’s “Prospective View,” perspectivism is spelled out as the thesis that an option is obligatory if and only if it maximizes what Zimmerman calls “prospective value,” which is in turn determined by the agent’s present evidence. In this article, I raise two objections to this approach. Firstly, I argue that spelling out the difference between perspectivism and anti-perspectivism in terms of value creates a number of problems that can be avoided by an account that proceeds in terms of reasons. Secondly, I argue that Zimmerman focuses on the wrong body of evidence, and that this commits him to an implausible solution to the problem that perspectivists face with regard to advice from better-informed sources.
ISSN:1745-5243
Enthält:Enthalten in: Journal of moral philosophy
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/17455243-20170007