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...

Полное описание

Сохранить в:  
Библиографические подробности
Главный автор: Leibowitz, Uri D. (Автор)
Формат: Электронный ресурс Статья
Язык:Английский
Проверить наличие: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Загрузка...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Опубликовано: Brill 2014
В: Journal of moral philosophy
Год: 2014, Том: 11, Выпуск: 1, Страницы: 35-56
Другие ключевые слова:B Moral Knowledge
B Principles
B Particularism
B generalism
B moral epistemology
Online-ссылка: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Описание
Итог: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
Второстепенные работы:Enthalten in: Journal of moral philosophy
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/17455243-4681012