scholarly journals Prosociality without morality: A Humean constructivist approach to prosocial practical reason for moral skeptics

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Nicholas Drake

<p>The moral skeptic frequently encounters the view that without a belief in moral facts she has insufficient justification for acting in prosocial ways, such as acting with concern for the interests or welfare of others. This thesis is an argument against that view. The thesis is in two parts, each employing a different type of philosophy. Part one is empirical philosophy, and draws on evidence from psychology and history to show that morality is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition of prosociality, and may in fact be an obstacle to it. Part two is in the fields of metaethics and practical reason, and addresses the question of how a moral skeptic can employ rationality to develop robust, stable, and coherent practical reasons for prosociality. I argue that this can be done by employing a Humean constructivist view. Finally, I use John Stuart Mill as a case study, arguing that he is a noncognitivist and thus a moral skeptic, and that a Humean constructivist reading of his utilitarian theory accounts for the harmony between his moral skepticism and his prosocial normative theory. Mill thus offers an example of prosociality and moral skepticism within a Humean constructivist framework.</p>

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Nicholas Drake

<p>The moral skeptic frequently encounters the view that without a belief in moral facts she has insufficient justification for acting in prosocial ways, such as acting with concern for the interests or welfare of others. This thesis is an argument against that view. The thesis is in two parts, each employing a different type of philosophy. Part one is empirical philosophy, and draws on evidence from psychology and history to show that morality is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition of prosociality, and may in fact be an obstacle to it. Part two is in the fields of metaethics and practical reason, and addresses the question of how a moral skeptic can employ rationality to develop robust, stable, and coherent practical reasons for prosociality. I argue that this can be done by employing a Humean constructivist view. Finally, I use John Stuart Mill as a case study, arguing that he is a noncognitivist and thus a moral skeptic, and that a Humean constructivist reading of his utilitarian theory accounts for the harmony between his moral skepticism and his prosocial normative theory. Mill thus offers an example of prosociality and moral skepticism within a Humean constructivist framework.</p>


Utilitas ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
NICHOLAS DRAKE

There is a common view that the utilitarian theory of John Stuart Mill is morally realist and involves a strong kind of practical obligation. This article argues for two negative theses and a positive thesis. The negative theses are that Mill is not a moral realist and that he does not believe in certain kinds of obligations, those involving external reasons and those I call robust obligations, obligations with a particular, strong kind of practical authority. The positive thesis is that Mill's metaethical position can be interpreted as a Humean constructivist view, a metaethical view that is constructivist about value and entails the existence of practical reasons, but not external reasons or robust obligations. I argue that a Humean constructivist reading of Mill's theory is reasonable, and strengthens Mill's argument from desire for the value of happiness, an important but notoriously weak aspect of his theory.


First Monday ◽  
2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico Meissner

In 1965, Galtung and Ruge published an influential list of news values. Fifty years later, my article takes this list to demonstrate how mass media principles still apply when building audiences for an independent film in the Internet age. The article builds on the constructivist approach that news values can be actively formulated and stressed. It uses the case study of independent film project 15Malaysia, illustrating how this project, though unknowingly, actively created news value to convince opinion leaders of its worth and, ultimately, build an audience of over two million viewers.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Chengwei Zhang ◽  
Xiaohong Li ◽  
Jing Hu ◽  
Zhiyong Feng ◽  
Jiaojiao Song

In the past, fairness verification of exchanges between the traders in E-commerce was based on a common assumption, so-called nonrepudiation property, which says that if the parties involved can deny that they have received or sent some information, then the exchanging protocol is unfair. So, the nonrepudiation property is not a sufficient condition. In this paper, we formulate a new notion of fairness verification based on the strand space model and propose a method for fairness verification, which can potentially determine whether evidences have been forged in transactions. We first present an innovative formal approach not to depend on nonrepudiation, and then establish a relative trader model and extend the strand space model in accordance with traders’ behaviors of E-commerce. We present a case study to demonstrate the effectiveness of our verification method.


2017 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olli Hellmann

This article argues that high levels of state capacity are not a sufficient condition for consolidating autocratic rule. Rather, whether non-democratic rulers can harness the infrastructural power of the state to implement strategies of regime stabilization depends on three crucial factors: the state’s social embedding; the international context; and the extent of elite cohesion. The paper develops this argument through a case study of the military–bureaucratic regime in South Korea (1961–1987), which – despite a high-capacity ‘developmental’ state at its disposal – failed to maintain high levels of resilience.


Dialogue ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 331-350
Author(s):  
Jonny Anomaly

ABSTRACTThis essay examines and criticizes a set of Kantian objections to Parfit's attempt in Reasons and Persons to connect his theory of personal identity to practical rationality and moral philosophy. Several of Parfit's critics have tried to sever the link he forges between his metaphysical and practical conclusions by invoking the Kantian thought that even if we accept his metaphysical theory of personal identity, we still have good practical grounds for rejecting that theory when deliberating about what to do. The argument between Parfit and his opponents illuminates broader questions about the relationship between our metaphysical beliefs and our practical reasons.


2019 ◽  
pp. 165-182
Author(s):  
Eva Meijer

The second case study draws on the insights developed in the first two parts of the thesis to investigate the goose-human conflict around Schiphol Airport. Geese are not wanted in the fields around the airport, yet they keep coming back because they like the grass. In response, humans kill them, even though this does not solve the problem. Many different parties play a role in this conflict—politicians, animal welfare activists, farmers, the airport, the general public—but the role of the geese is underexposed. The geese are the center of attention, but no one is paying attention to their views on the matter, nor is anyone interested in working with them to solve this situation. This is unfortunate for normative and practical reasons. Seeing geese as political actors, paying attention to their species-specific behaviors, and investigating how they act politically can help us to establish new relations, and further clarify how human political concepts can play a role in interspecies relations more generally.


Author(s):  
F. M. Kamm

This chapter concerns Derek Parfit’s discussion in his On What Matters, volume 3 of the irrelevance of deontological distinctions. Parfit begins by expressing his concern that morality will be undermined because practical reason, which tells us all things considered what to do, will often conflict with what we consider to be morally right. Unlike Sidgwick, Parfit does not begin by identifying morality with a part of impartial practical reason but rather with what he considers common sense deontology. Also, unlike Sidgwick, he thinks it is clear that sometimes self-interest (which provides some reason even impartially considered) is overridden by (other) impartial practical reasons (e.g., there is decisive reason to give one’s penny to save millions of other people). This chapter first considers how Parfit thinks one’s practical reason should reconcile concerns about self-sacrifice, pursuing the greater good, and morality. It then considers his use of case-based reasoning to undermine moral principles embodying such distinctions as harming versus not aiding, harming as a mere means versus as a side effect, and redirecting threats (as in the Trolley Problem) versus starting new ones.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document