Moral Perception without (Prior) Moral Knowledge

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 164-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Preston J. Werner
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
Background Knowledge ◽  
Moral Knowledge ◽  
Moral Perception

Proponents of impure moral perception claim that, while there are perceptual moral experiences, these experiences epistemically depend on a priori moral knowledge. Proponents of pure moral perception claim that moral experiences can justify independently of substantive a priori moral knowledge. Some philosophers, most notably David Faraci (2015), have argued that the pure view is mistaken, since moral perception requires previous moral background knowledge, and such knowledge could not itself be perceptual. I defend pure moral perception against this objection. I consider two ways to understand the notion of “background knowledge” that is crucial to the objection. On a (stronger) reading, the claim that background knowledge is necessary for moral perception is likely false. On a second and weaker reading, the claim is true, but the background knowledge in question could be perceptual, and thus compatible with pure moral perception. Thus, the objection fails.

scholarly journals Moral Perception and the Reliability Challenge

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Faraci
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
Moral Epistemology ◽  
Moral Knowledge ◽  
Moral Perception ◽  
Moral Beliefs ◽  
Dead End ◽  
Reliability Challenge

Given a traditional intuitionist moral epistemology, it is notoriously difficult for moral realists to explain the reliability of our moral beliefs. This has led some to go looking for an alternative to intuitionism. Perception is an obvious contender. I previously argued that this is a dead end, that all moral perception is dependent on a priori moral knowledge. This suggests that perceptualism merely moves the bump in the rug where the reliability challenge is concerned. Preston Werner responds that my account rests on an overly intellectualized model of perception. In this paper, I argue that though Werner may well be correct, my arguments, properly extended, still suggest that perceptualism leaves realists in no better position than intuitionism when it comes to the reliability challenge.

Moral Perception and Its Rivals

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah McGrath
Keyword(s):  
Moral Knowledge ◽  
Moral Perception ◽  
Attractive Alternative ◽  
Alternative Account ◽  
Perceptual Knowledge ◽  
Relevant Class

Proponents of moral perception hold that some of our moral knowledge is perceptual knowledge. Discussions of whether moral perception is possible often seem to assume that there is some attractive alternative account of how we arrive at moral knowledge in those cases that are regarded as among the best candidates for cases of full-fledged moral perception. This chapter challenges that assumption by critically examining some alternative accounts of how we arrive at knowledge in the relevant class of cases, arguing that the more closely one examines these alternative accounts, the more implausible they seem as accounts of how we actually manage to arrive at moral knowledge. A modest version of moral perception is sketched, one that does not suffer from any similarly implausible commitments. There are some concluding reflections on why it matters whether some of our moral knowledge is perceptual.

Moral Perception: Causal, Phenomenological, and Epistemological Elements

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Audi
Keyword(s):  
Moral Judgment ◽  
Moral Belief ◽  
Moral Knowledge ◽  
Moral Perception ◽  
Perceptual Knowledge ◽  
Moral Properties ◽  
Do So

This chapter analyzes how perception is a kind of experiential information-bearing relation between the perceiver and the object perceived. It argues that even if moral properties are not themselves causal, they can be perceptible. But the dependence of moral perception on non-moral perception does not imply an inferential dependence of all moral belief or moral judgment on non-moral belief or judgment. This kind of grounding explains how a moral belief arising in perception can constitute perceptual knowledge and can do so on grounds that are publicly accessible and, though not a guarantee of it, a basis for ethical agreement. The chapter also shows how perceptual moral knowledge is connected not only with other moral knowledge but also with intuition and emotion.

Knowledge, belief, and moral psychology

2021 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Mikhail
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Moral Psychology ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Moral Knowledge ◽  
Knowledge Representations ◽  
Knowledge Attributions ◽  
Moral Beliefs ◽  
Strong Case ◽  
Synthetic A Priori ◽  
The Law

Abstract Phillips et al. make a strong case that knowledge representations should play a larger role in cognitive science. Their arguments are reinforced by comparable efforts to place moral knowledge, rather than moral beliefs, at the heart of a naturalistic moral psychology. Conscience, Kant's synthetic a priori, and knowledge attributions in the law all point in a similar direction.

Observation and Experience

2019 ◽  
pp. 106-150
Author(s):  
Sarah McGrath
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
Moral Community ◽  
Moral Knowledge ◽  
Moral Testimony ◽  
The World ◽  
Moral Claims

This chapter explores how experience and observation contribute to moral knowledge. It defends the view that experience and observation can contribute to moral knowledge in any of the ways in which they contribute to our ordinary, non-moral knowledge of the world around us, including by empirically confirming and disconfirming moral claims. I argue that moral testimony has important implications for the possibility of confirming moral views by non-moral observations. I also argue that membership in a moral community, which puts one in a position to compare the moral opinions of others with one’s own, can contribute to moral knowledge not only by affording evidence for or against one’s opinions, but also by providing feedback that can serve to calibrate one’s capacity for judgment so that future exercises of that judgment are more likely to deliver knowledge. The chapter concludes with a discussion of a priori moral knowledge.

From species to supertrees: Popperian corroboration and some current controversies in systematics

2004 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan P. Faith
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
Background Knowledge ◽  
Phylogenetic Inference ◽  
Tail Probabilities ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Positive Side ◽  
Inclusive Approach ◽  
Growth Of Knowledge ◽  
Repeated Use ◽  
Assessment Of Evidence

Popper's ideas of falsification and corroboration have been used over a long period to justify cladistic parsimony to the exclusion of other methods for phylogenetic inference. This has been based on a restrictive interpretation that takes observed data as Popperian evidence, and sees Popperian background knowledge as restricted to 'descent with modification'. An alternative, 'inclusive', interpretation, developed over the past decade, does not focus on corroboration as an automatic by-product of supposed non-falsification, but instead focuses on the useful fact that the evidence (e) for an hypothesis provides Popperian corroboration only when it is improbable in the absence of that hypothesis. This perspective highlights key errors in cladistic arguments, including a critical failure to ever assess corroboration through examination of improbability of evidence and a failure to view background knowledge as playing a role in casting doubts about supposed positive evidence. The pitfalls of Popperian justification of phylogenetic methods are not limited to cladistics. Justifications of likelihood methods unfortunately have repeated these key errors of cladistic philosophy, including the failure to satisfy the Popperian corroboration requirement that tests of hypotheses be 'genuine', as indicated by assessment of improbability of evidence given only background knowledge. Criticisms of the inclusive perspective are recognised as incorrect, based on the realisation that evidence e can relate to the hypothesis, that background knowledge can reflect chance, that corroboration does permit tail probabilities, and that corroboration in the inclusive framework is linked to tests as attempted refutations and so remains compatible with falsification. On the positive side, the inclusive approach opens the door to growth of knowledge through assessment of evidence, with no philosophical restriction on the forms of evidence in phylogenetic inference. Whatever the evidence put forward, corroboration can be claimed if attempts to explain away that evidence fail, so providing an indication of the improbability of the evidence without the hypothesis. Further, the repeated use of a form of evidence may reveal its pitfalls—the kinds of occasions when it does not provide corroboration—so providing lessons that guide the future search for effective evidence in different contexts. This theme of resisting the a priori justification of one form of evidence, and focusing sceptically on many different kinds of evidence, is critical in the two other systematics contexts. First, a unified species concept only makes sense if there is a way to sort through the pluralism that remains at the level of evidence for species hypotheses. Second, for building the tree of life (TOL) we must combine various pieces of evidence from separate studies in a meaningful way to evaluate TOL hypotheses. In both cases, Popperian corroboration provides the necessary framework for judging how our evidence bears on our hypotheses.

Moral Perception, Aesthetic Perception, and Intuitive Judgment

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Audi
Keyword(s):  
Moral Intuition ◽  
Moral Knowledge ◽  
Moral Perception ◽  
Aesthetic Perception ◽  
Aesthetic Object ◽  
Intuitive Judgment ◽  
Aesthetic Cognition

This chapter provides a comparison between moral and aesthetic knowledge and other aspects of the similarity between moral and aesthetic cognition. The connections between aesthetics and ethics are especially important for understanding moral perception and moral intuition. There is aesthetic perception, as opposed to mere perception of an aesthetic object, just as there is moral perception, as opposed to mere perception of a moral phenomenon. One may also find aesthetic disagreements that, even more than moral disagreements, challenge the view that normative domains have objective standards. The chapter shows how singular moral knowledge is like singular aesthetic knowledge in resting on a response to properties which ground the truth of the normative propositions known.

The Mystery of Moral Perception

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Crow
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
Moral Perception ◽  
A Priori Justification ◽  
Interesting Alternative

Accounts of non-naturalist moral perception have been advertised as an empiricist-friendly epistemological alternative to moral rationalism. I argue that these accounts of moral perception conceal a core commitment of rationalism—to substantive a priori justification—and embody its most objectionable feature—namely, “mysteriousness.” Thus, accounts of non-naturalist moral perception do not amount to an interesting alternative to moral rationalism.

Emotion and Intuition as Sources of Moral Judgment

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Audi
Keyword(s):  
Moral Judgment ◽  
Moral Intuition ◽  
Moral Knowledge ◽  
Moral Perception ◽  
Normal Person ◽  
Moral Intuitions ◽  
Moral Concepts

This chapter examines how moral perception is possible for virtually any normal person with an elementary mastery of moral concepts. But moral perception is by no means the only route to moral intuition or moral knowledge; reflection is another way. Moral intuitions may also arise in a quite different way: from emotion. The importance of emotional evidence in ethical matters is best appreciated when its relation to moral perception and moral intuition is taken into account. The chapter argues that people sometimes know things that they would not otherwise know, which is possible through the evidence of emotion, often where the emotion is connected with intuition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document