AGAINST METAETHICAL IMPERIALISM: Several Arguments for Equal Partnerships between the Deontic and Aretaic.
Virtue and deontological ethics are now commonly contrasted as rival approaches to moral inquiry. However, I argue that neither metaethical party should seek complete, solitary domination of the ethical domain. Reductive treatments of the right or the virtuous, as well as projects that abandon the f...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Religious Ethics Vol. 38; no. 3; pp. 521 - 545 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Sep2010
|
| 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=52950873&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 52950873 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 03849694 REH jtl: Journal of Religious Ethics issn: 03849694 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Sep2010 vid: 38 iid: 3 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 52950873 10.1111/j.1467-9795.2010.00444.x ppf: 521 ppct: 24 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 107KB tig: atl: AGAINST METAETHICAL IMPERIALISM: Several Arguments for Equal Partnerships between the Deontic and Aretaic. aug: au: Couenhoven, Jesse affil: Department of Humanities, Villanova University su: Essays Imperialism Deontic logic Moral proof of God Conduct of life sug: subj: Essays Imperialism Deontic logic Moral proof of God Conduct of life keyword: character deontology metaethics reductionism rules virtue ab: Virtue and deontological ethics are now commonly contrasted as rival approaches to moral inquiry. However, I argue that neither metaethical party should seek complete, solitary domination of the ethical domain. Reductive treatments of the right or the virtuous, as well as projects that abandon the former or latter, are bound to leave us with a sadly diminished map of the moral territories crucial to our lives. Thus, it is better for the two parties to seek a more cordial and equal relationship, one that permits metaethical pluralism, and acknowledges mutual dependence. I do not seek to prescribe how that relationship should look: this essay offers less a positive metaethical position than a prolegomenon to such a position, one that attempts to head off harmful attempts to reduce the territory of the aretaic to that of the deontic, or that of the deontic to the aretaic. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Journal of Religious Ethics 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: Journal of Religious Ethics holder: Wiley-Blackwell dt: @attributes: year: 2010 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|