Abstract
T. M. Scanlon's buck-passing account of value (BPA) has been subjected to a barrage of criticisms. Recently, to be helpful to BPA, Roger Crisp has suggested that a number of these criticisms can be met if one makes some revisions to BPA. In this paper, I argue that if advocates of the buck-passing account accepted these revisions, they would effectively be giving up the buck-passing account as it is typically understood, that is, as an account concerned with the conceptual priority of reasons or the right vis-à-vis value or the good. I conclude by addressing some of the broader implications of my arguments for the current debate about the buck-passing account of value.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 421-432 |
Number of pages | 12 |
Journal | Philosophical Studies |
Volume | 151 |
Issue number | 3 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Dec 2010 |
Keywords
- Buck-passing account of value
- Reasons and value
- Roger Crisp
- T. M. Scanlon
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Philosophy