Abstract
The debate between proponents and opponents of a role for empirical psychology in ethical theory seems to be deadlocked. This paper aims to clarify the terms of that debate, and to defend a principled middle position. I argue against extreme views, which see empirical psychology either as irrelevant to, or as wholly displacing, reflective moral inquiry. Instead, I argue that moral theorists of all stripes are committed to a certain conception of moral thought-as aimed at abstracting away from individual inclinations and toward interpersonal norms-and that this conception tells against both extremes. Since we cannot always know introspectively whether our particular moral judgments achieve this interpersonal standard, we must seek the sort of self-knowledge offered by empirical psychology. Yet reflective assessment of this new information remains a matter of substantive normative theorizing, rather than an immediate consequence of empirical findings themselves.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 257-274 |
Number of pages | 18 |
Journal | Journal of Ethics |
Volume | 17 |
Issue number | 3 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Sep 2013 |
Keywords
- Cognitive science of ethics
- Intuitions
- Moral methodology
- Moral psychology
- Normative abstraction
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Philosophy