8 edition of On justifying moral judgments found in the catalog.
On justifying moral judgments
Lawrence C. Becker
Includes bibliographical references.
|Statement||[by] Lawrence C. Becker.|
|Series||International library of philosophy and scientific method|
|LC Classifications||BJ1012 .B42 1973|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||xii, 199 p.|
|Number of Pages||199|
|LC Control Number||73164877|
Considered moral judgments depend on reaching an equilibrium amongst all levels of moral inquiry. Reflective equilibrium is the process of reflecting on all three levels of moral inquiry to generate a coherent view. In cases where the different levels of moral thinking conflict, we adjust each level in order to achieve an equilibrium. This chapter argues that the moral rules: do not deceive, keep your promises, do not cheat, obey the law, and do your duty, are justified moral rules. It provides analyses of deception, promises, cheating, law, and duties. After showing the importance of fallibility, it points out some problems with rule consequentialism.
The Moral Landscape Challenge: The Winning Essay. Last August, I issued the following challenge: It has been nearly three years since The Moral Landscape was first published in English, and in that time it has been attacked by readers and nonreaders alike. Many seem to have judged from the resulting cacophony that the book’s central thesis was easily refuted. Morality (from Latin: moralitas, lit. 'manner, character, proper behavior') is the differentiation of intentions, decisions and actions between those that are distinguished as proper and those that are improper. Morality can be a body of standards or principles derived from a code of conduct from a particular philosophy, religion or culture, or it can derive from a standard that a person.
-John Rawls views moral justification as a reflective testing of our moral beliefs, moral principles, theoretical postulates, and the like to make them as coherent as possible. -Method in ethics properly begins with our "considered judgments," which are moral convictions in which we have the highest confidence and believe to have the least bias. Extant models of moral judgment assume that an action’s intentionality precedes assignments of blame. Knobe (b) challenged this fundamental order and proposed instead that the badness or blameworthiness of an action directs (and thus unduly biases) people’s intentionality and other researchers’ studies suggested that blameworthy actions are considered intentional even.
meaning of the Holy Quran
A life on the Black River in Arkansas
Unclutter your life in one week
Preliminary report on manuscript materials in British archives relating to the American Revolution in the West Indian islands
Antonio Vivaldi: his life and work
place of the reign of Edward II in English history
Ready-to-wear apparel analysis
Raku then and now
The golden plough
Exchange of certain school lands in Wyoming.
Sounds in the Sea
Handbook of public opinion research
The thesis of On Justifying Moral Judgments insists, on the contrary, that rigorous justifications are possible for moral judgments.
Crucially, Becker argues for the coordination of the three main approaches to moral theory: axiology, deontology, and agent morality. The thesis of On Justifying Moral Judgments insists, on the contrary, that rigorous justifications are possible for moral judgments.
Crucially, Becker argues for the coordination of the three main approaches to moral theory: axiology, deontology, and agent : Taylor & Francis. The thesis of On Justifying Moral Judgments insists, on the contrary, that rigorous justifications are possible for moral judgments.
Crucially, Becker argues for the coordination of the three main approaches to moral On justifying moral judgments book axiology, deontology, and agent by: 4.
Additional Physical Format: Online version: Becker, Lawrence C. On justifying moral judgments. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul; New York, Humanities Press, COVID Resources. Reliable information about the coronavirus (COVID) is available from the World Health Organization (current situation, international travel).Numerous and frequently-updated resource results are available from this ’s WebJunction has pulled together information and resources to assist library staff as they consider how to handle coronavirus.
: On Justifying Moral Judgments (International library of philosophy and scientific method) (): Becker, Lawrence C.: BooksFormat: Hardcover. Reissued by Routledge in hbk and e-book, Property Rights: Philosophic Foundations.
London and New York, Routledge & Kegan Paul, Pbk, Reissued by Routledge in hbk and e-book, On Justifying Moral Judgments. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, Reissued by Routledge in hbk and e-book, Books edited with Charlotte B.
The Process of Justifying Executive Moral Judgments. In general, any moral justification of one’s corporate judgment and decision involves five supporting sets of beliefs and values held by a particular person in one or more of the following hierarchical series of moral values: Whether called “inner voice” (Book of Wisdom) or the Author: Fr.
Oswald A. Mascarenhas. Self-Quizzes. What does Sober regard as the main conceptual problem for environmentalism. justifying the preservation of species or ecosystems on the basis of their instrumental value to us Sober thinks that justifying environmentalist policy objectives requires the wholesale jettisoning of most familiar moral judgments.
True b. This remains the case even while political crises become intractable, and it is increasingly apparent that the scope of public policy formulated with no reference to moral justification is extremely thesis of On Justifying Moral Judgments insists, on the contrary, that rigorous justifications are possible for moral judgments.
This chapter examines several linguistic theories of moral judgments, and shows that none of them is able to distinguish between moral judgments and non-moral judgments. It uses the distinction between moral standards and responsibility standards to clarify the difference between praise and condemnation, which are related to the former, and blame and credit, which are related to the latter.
The other problem involves identifying the ultimate grounds of moral judgments. It has been asserted that the various time-honored theories of normative ethics are uniformly without foundation and that, consequently, we appear unable to arrive at a systematic knowledge of good and evil .Cited by: A Dissociation Between Moral Judgments and Justification Article (PDF Available) in Mind & Language 22(1) February with Reads How we measure 'reads'.
The search for justification remains essential in enhancing the persuasiveness of ethical action that aims at the moral ""contagion"" of the people by the human rights experience and the transition from moral acceptance to legal in intellectual scope, Justifying Ethics draws upon moral and political philosophy, social Cited by: 3.
Advanced Search. Browse. Intuition works rather like a lawyer, justifying moral judgments to others and ourselves, supporting our reputation and self interest. The Righteous Mind exposes how it is emotion and intuition, not reason, that drives moral judgment, showing us how understanding the moral foundations on which our interests are based can benefit us in decision.
New research published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, provides intriguing insights into some of the factors that influence how we make moral judgments. Reappraising Our Emotions Allows Cooler Heads to Prevail.
We might like to think that our judgments are always well thought-out, but research suggests that our moral judgments are often. Abstract. In this chapter I shall discuss the nature of moral judgment, especially its statistical nature, the values of various moral entities, and some related problems, namely the justification for moral judgment, Mill’s “proof” of the principle of utility, and the question “Why do we take moral actions?”Author: C.
Sheng. Materialism and Morality: The Problem with Pinker Such an understanding of ourselves collides headlong into what many regard as the basic requirement for justifying moral judgments: the capacity to act and to shape one’s character at least partially independently of causal influences.
a good materialist whose book is devoted to. In the area of morals and ethics, people cannot exercise moral judgment without being given a choice; in other words, a necessity for making a sound moral judgment is being able to choose an option from among a number of choices.
People use moral reasoning to make moral judgments or to discover right actions. Introduction to Ethics 5File Size: KB. Respecting Freedom and Cultivating Virtues in Justifying Constitutional Rights Linda C. McClain and James E. Fleming it is a book about political philosophy, what we owe one another as citizens.
c. rights insulate right-holders from moral judgments about their exercise.Moral arguments for God’s existence form a diverse family of arguments that reason from some feature of morality or the moral life to the existence of God, usually understood as a morally good creator of the universe. Moral arguments are both important and interesting.
They are interesting because evaluating their soundness requires attention.step back and explain what makes moral judgment and decision making unique.
We then review three major research themes and their explananda: (i) morally prohibited value tradeoffs in decision making, (ii) rules, reason, and emotion in tradeoffs, and (iii) judgments of moral blame and Size: KB.