Justificatory Moral Pluralism: A Novel Form of Environmental Pragmatism

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andre Santos Campos ◽  
Sofia Guedes Vaz
Keyword(s):  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Environmental Ethics ◽  
Traditional Method ◽  
Ethical Theory ◽  
Moral Pluralism ◽  
Ethical Theories ◽  
Environmental Decision Making ◽  
Environmental Decisions ◽  
Viable Solution ◽  
Environmental Pragmatism

Moral reasoning typically informs environmental decision-making by measuring the possible outcomes of policies or actions in light of a preferred ethical theory. This method is subject to many problems. Environmental pragmatism tries to overcome them, but it suffers also from some pitfalls. This paper proposes a new method of environmental pragmatism that avoids the problems of both the traditional method of environmental moral reasoning and of the general versions of environmental pragmatism. We call it ‘justificatory moral pluralism’ – it develops the intuition that normative ethical theories need not be mutually exclusive. This leaves room for important forms of pluralist environmental ethics that do not require a once-and-for-all prior commitment to an ethical theory when deciding about policies or courses of action related to the protection of the environment. Justificatory moral pluralism offers a viable solution to the recurrent conflicts between efficient environmental decisions and the need for moral reasoning.

Empiricism in Ethics

1975 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 216-230
Author(s):  
Stephan Körner
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Theory ◽  
Logical Inference ◽  
Moral Pluralism ◽  
Moral Argument ◽  
Ethical Theories ◽  
The World ◽  
Moral System ◽  
Empiricist Theory

The purpose of this essay is to exhibit certain crucial shortcomings of some representative empiricist and anti-empiricist ethical theories and to sketch an empiricist ethics which is not exposed to these objections and adequate to our cognitive and practical position in the world. The discussion falls into two parts. Part I, which is mainly critical, begins with a general distinction between empiricist and anti-empiricist ethical theories and surveys the assumptions which are permissible to the former in the sphere of factual beliefs, practical attitudes and logical inference (section 1). It then examines the central theses of three kinds of empiricist ethical theory, namely utilitarian, contractual and emotivist theories (section 2) and of three corresponding kinds of anti-empiricist theory which can be viewed as attempts at correcting the faults of their empiricist counterparts (section 3). Part II, which is mainly constructive, contains a sketch of a new empiricist ethics (section 4) and in its light a brief discussion of various types of moral system (section 5) of the limits of moral pluralism and the nature of moral argument (section 6).

Empiricism in Ethics

1975 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 216-230
Author(s):  
Stephan Körner
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Theory ◽  
Logical Inference ◽  
Moral Pluralism ◽  
Moral Argument ◽  
Ethical Theories ◽  
The World ◽  
Moral System ◽  
Empiricist Theory

The purpose of this essay is to exhibit certain crucial shortcomings of some representative empiricist and anti-empiricist ethical theories and to sketch an empiricist ethics which is not exposed to these objections and adequate to our cognitive and practical position in the world. The discussion falls into two parts. Part I, which is mainly critical, begins with a general distinction between empiricist and anti-empiricist ethical theories and surveys the assumptions which are permissible to the former in the sphere of factual beliefs, practical attitudes and logical inference (section 1). It then examines the central theses of three kinds of empiricist ethical theory, namely utilitarian, contractual and emotivist theories (section 2) and of three corresponding kinds of anti-empiricist theory which can be viewed as attempts at correcting the faults of their empiricist counterparts (section 3). Part II, which is mainly constructive, contains a sketch of a new empiricist ethics (section 4) and in its light a brief discussion of various types of moral system (section 5) of the limits of moral pluralism and the nature of moral argument (section 6).

Communicating moral reasoning in medicine as an expression of respect for patients and integrity among professionals

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauris Christopher Kaldjian
Keyword(s):  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Moral Reasons ◽  
Moral Pluralism ◽  
Moral Integrity ◽  
Moral Beliefs ◽  
Moral Framework ◽  
Beliefs And Values ◽  
Moral Frameworks ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Do So

The communication of moral reasoning in medicine can be understood as a means of showing respect for patients and colleagues through the giving of moral reasons for actions. This communication is especially important when disagreements arise. While moral reasoning should strive for impartiality, it also needs to acknowledge the individual moral beliefs and values that distinguish each person (moral particularity) and give rise to the challenge of contrasting moral frameworks (moral pluralism). Efforts to communicate moral reasoning should move beyond common approaches to principles-based reasoning in medical ethics by addressing the underlying beliefs and values that define our moral frameworks and guide our interpretations and applications of principles. Communicating about underlying beliefs and values requires a willingness to grapple with challenges of accessibility (the degree to which particular beliefs and values are intelligible between persons) and translatability (the degree to which particular beliefs and values can be transposed from one moral framework to another) as words and concepts are used to communicate beliefs and values. Moral dialogues between professionals and patients and among professionals themselves need to be handled carefully, and sometimes these dialogues invite reference to underlying beliefs and values. When professionals choose to articulate such beliefs and values, they can do so as an expression of respectful patient care and collaboration and as a means of promoting their own moral integrity by signalling the need for consistency between their own beliefs, words and actions.

Conclusion

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Fedyk
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Theory ◽  
Ethical Theories ◽  
Psychological Organization ◽  
Different Levels

This chapter rearticulates many of the major ideas and arguments in the proceeding chapters. But it also connects one of the primary conclusions of the book up with a debate in ethics over what the structure and form of ethical theories should look like. The proceeding chapters show that one possible form that an ethical theory can take is a loose confederacies of different models and frameworks that apply to different levels of social and psychological organization.

Philosophical Grounding of Ethics Expertise

2018 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Ana Frunza
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Social Practice ◽  
Ethical Theories ◽  
New Model ◽  
Deontological Ethics ◽  
Moral Conduct ◽  
Practical Nature ◽  
Ethics Expertise

The chapter proposes to philosophically ground the ethics expertise in social work, starting from a series of ethics theories: utilitarian ethics, deontological ethics and ethics of virtues. During the foundation of ethics expertise we made conceptual distinctions between the theoretical and practical nature of expertise, between the ethical and the moral one, in order to justify the need for a new model of ethics expertise. In our approach, we debate the influence of such theories in the field of social services, which we consider to be representative in the context of the construction of a new model of ethics expertise, which underlies the constitutive values of social practice. The normativity of the ethical theories is extended to the level of certain different behavioural models and moral reasoning, summing up in practice the frameworks of the moral conduct the individuals can apply, when making an ethical decision, in social or organisational context, namely to determine whether the decision is morally acceptable or not.

Biotechnology: The Ethics

1993 ◽  
Vol 1993 ◽  
pp. 25-25
Author(s):  
T B Mepham
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Theory ◽  
Reflective Equilibrium ◽  
Rational Analysis ◽  
Ethical Theories

Few people question the basis of their moral viewpoints, yet if science is to be applied ethically it is necessary to subject these viewpoints to rational analysis. The paper provides an overview of prominent ethical theories (deontological and consequentalist) and their impact on novel and prospective animal biotechnologies. These theories are applied to the principles of: autonomy, justice, nonmaleficence and beneficence in relation to the interests of animals, the environment and humans.Deontological approaches include ‘rights’-based theories (often derived intuitively or from scriptural sources) and ‘contractualist’ theories, dependent on an ‘unwritten contract’ between rational beings to ensure fairness. For consequentialists (eg utilitarians), it is the outcome of actions that determines their ethical value. Few people, consciously or unconsciously, consistently employ a single ethical theory, but there is often much concordance between actions based on the different theories. Except for some intuitionists, ethicists emphasise the role of rationality in ethical theory; for even though intuition is an important element, many consider that universalizability of ethical theories entails the establishment of a ‘reflective equilibrium’

scholarly journals Ethical Theories and Moral Guidance

Utilitas ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-309 ◽  
Author(s):  
PEKKA VÄYRYNEN
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Theory ◽  
Ought Implies Can ◽  
Ethical Theories ◽  
Better Than ◽  
Moral Guidance

Let the Guidance Constraint be the following norm for evaluating ethical theories: Other things being at least roughly equal, ethical theories are better to the extent that they provide adequate moral guidance. I offer an account of why ethical theories are subject to the Guidance Constraint, if indeed they are. We can explain central facts about adequate moral guidance, and their relevance to ethical theory, by appealing to certain forms of autonomy and fairness. This explanation is better than explanations that feature versions of the principle that ‘ought’ implies ‘can’. In closing, I address the objection that my account is questionable because it makes ethical theories subject not merely to purely theoretical but also to morally substantive norms.

Instrument for Verification of Ethical Theories in Physical Culture

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-91
Author(s):  
Miloš Marković ◽  
Božo Bokan
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Theory ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
Female Students ◽  
Male Students ◽  
Physical Culture ◽  
Ethical Theories ◽  
Hypothetical Model ◽  
Statistical Indicators

AbstractThis study tested an instrument entitled “Physical Culture and Ethics” which consisted of 44 statements to which subjects responded on a Likert-type five-point scale. The statements reflected the ethical theories of Aristotle (14 statements), Kant (14 statements) and Mill (16 statements).The hypothetical model of ethical theories was verified on a sample of 163 students at the Faculty of Sport and Physical Education in Belgrade (119 male students and 44 female students), attending all years of study (n1=22, n2=34, n3=36, n4=48, n5=23). We hypothesized that students would display greater maturity in terms of education and reaffirm their positions towards ethical issues in physical culture as they progressed in their studies, and also that the male and the female students had their specific moral outlooks on the reality of physical culture.When comparing the basic statistical indicators of students’ responses to statements reflecting the ethical theories (Aristotle, Kant, Mill) against the year of study students were in (mean value and standard deviation) – certain variation in values from the first to the fifth year of study was observed, thus confirming the hypothesis.When comparing the basic statistical indicators of male and female students’ responses to statements reflecting the ethical theories (Aristotle, Kant, Mill) – female students’ results were better on all scales, and Aristotle’s ethical theory showed a statistical significance, thus confirming the second hypothesis as well.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document