Moral blame and rational criticism.

A central issue in practical philosophy concerns the relation between moral blameworthiness and normative reasons. As there has been little of direct exchange between the debate on reasons and the debate on blameworthiness, this topic has not received the attention it deserves. In this paper, I cons...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:European Journal of Philosophy Vol. 30; no. 1; pp. 345 - 361
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Mar2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=155808234&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 155808234
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        09668373
        7PU
      jtl: European Journal of Philosophy
      issn: 09668373
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Mar2022
      vid: 30
      iid: 1
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
    artinfo:
      ui:
        155808234
        10.1111/ejop.12646
      ppf: 345
      ppct: 16
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 1.3MB
      tig:
        atl: Moral blame and rational criticism.
      aug:
      su:
        Responsibility
        Metaethics
        Reason
        Debate
        Williams, Bernard, 1929-2003
      sug:
        subj:
          Responsibility
          Metaethics
          Reason
          Debate
          Williams, Bernard, 1929-2003
      ab: A central issue in practical philosophy concerns the relation between moral blameworthiness and normative reasons. As there has been little of direct exchange between the debate on reasons and the debate on blameworthiness, this topic has not received the attention it deserves. In this paper, I consider two notions about blameworthiness and reasons that are fundamental in respective field. The two notions might seem incontrovertible when considered individually, but I argue that they together entail claims that are highly contentious. In particular, I maintain that they entail unreasonable and contradictory claims since the practices of moral blame and rational criticism diverge with regard to three dimensions: justification, response, and function. Thus, we need to give up one of the principal notions. The solutions to this puzzle suggest that the connection between reasons and rationality is weaker than standardly presumed in metaethics.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of European Journal of Philosophy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: European Journal of Philosophy
      holder: Wiley-Blackwell
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2022
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N