How to Work with Context in Moral Philosophy?

Author:

Christensen Anne-Marie Søndergaard1

Affiliation:

1. Philosophy, Department for the Study of Culture, University of Southern Denmark , Odense , Denmark

Abstract

Abstract In this article, I investigate how we may include investigations of actual context in the investigation of moral problems in philosophy. The article has three main parts. The focus of the first is a survey of the dominant view of how to incorporate context into moral philosophy and to exemplify this view, I investigate examples from influential introductions to moral philosophy, identifying what I call the assumption of abstraction. In the second part I present three traditions which attribute a more prominent place to context in philosophical work and which therefore offer resources for thinking about context: moral contextualism, particularism and contextualism in political philosophy. Unconvinced that these resources are sufficient for an understanding of how actual context may be of importance in philosophy, I in the third part turn to a systematic investigation of three suggestions for how to incorporate actual context onto philosophy: the application approach, the bottom-up approach and the contextual approach. Furthermore, I argue that the third and most radical approach develops a superior understanding of how to include context in moral philosophy, reflecting the impossibility of making normatively neutral investigations of context in moral philosophy.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Philosophy

Reference48 articles.

1. Annas, J. 2006. “Virtue Ethics.” In The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theories, edited by D. Copp, 515–36. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

2. Bader, V., and S. Saharso. 2004. “Contextualized Morality and Ethno-Religious Diversity.” Ethical Theory & Moral Practice 7 (2): 107–15, https://doi.org/10.1023/b:etta.0000032758.77152.0a.

3. Baier, A. C. 1985. “What Do Women Want in a Moral Theory?” Noûs 9 (1): 53–63, https://doi.org/10.2307/2215117.

4. Baier, A. C. 1989. “Doing without Moral Theory.” In Anti-Theory in Ethics and Moral Conservatism, edited by S. G. Clarke, and E. Simpson. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

5. Beauchamp, T. L., and J. F. Childress. 1979. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3