[lit-ideas] Re: Justifying Moral Principles?
- From: Adriano Palma <Palma@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 11:05:10 +0000
The correct reason has a single axion: rorty is dead, nobody misses the idiot.
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Walter C. Okshevsky
Sent: 21 February 2015 12:58
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Justifying Moral Principles?
We justify our judgements and actions through the giving and assessing of
reasons. In doing so, we appeal to one or more moral principles for purposes
of securing satisfactory levels of impartiality and objectivity. But can the
principles themselves be justified? Could Rorty"s "ethnocentrism" really be the
last word on the subject? On that meta=ethical view, any attempt to justify a
moral scheme or "vocabulary" would prove to be question-begging since the
justification would have to appeal to principles, norms and criteria internal
to its own vocabulary. So how then do we justify the Categorical Imperative,
Principle of Equal Respect for Persons, The Original Position, Principle of
Discourse, etc.. Are these really but articles of political faith?
Thawing out on the Avalon, NL
Walter O
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest
on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
