Explaining Moral Knowledge

In this paper I assess the viability of a particularist explanation of moral knowledge. First, I consider two arguments by Sean McKeever and Michael Ridge that purport to show that a generalist, principle-based explanation of practical wisdom—understood as the ability to acquire moral knowledge in a...

ver descrição completa

Na minha lista:  
Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor principal: Leibowitz, Uri D. (Author)
Tipo de documento: Recurso Electrónico Artigo
Idioma:Inglês
Verificar disponibilidade: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Carregar...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publicado em: Brill 2014
Em: Journal of moral philosophy
Ano: 2014, Volume: 11, Número: 1, Páginas: 35-56
Outras palavras-chave:B Moral Knowledge
B Principles
B Particularism
B generalism
B moral epistemology
Acesso em linha: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Descrição
Resumo:In this paper I assess the viability of a particularist explanation of moral knowledge. First, I consider two arguments by Sean McKeever and Michael Ridge that purport to show that a generalist, principle-based explanation of practical wisdom—understood as the ability to acquire moral knowledge in a wide range of situations—is superior to a particularist, non-principle-based account. I contend that both arguments are unsuccessful. Then, I propose a particularist-friendly explanation of knowledge of particular moral facts. I argue that when we are careful to keep separate the various explanatory tasks at hand we can see that a particularist-friendly explanation of the fact that (e.g.,) Jane knows that A is morally right might not be so difficult to come by. Moreover, I suggest that a particularist approach to explaining knowledge of particular moral facts may go some way towards discharging the challenge of moral scepticism.
ISSN:1745-5243
Obras secundárias:Enthalten in: Journal of moral philosophy
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/17455243-4681012