12/14/2007
Wall Street Journal, Dec 5 2007
This is a rather short piece that lays out some of the issues in moral philosophy: how there are rule and act consequentialists and absolute and moderate deontologists. Author also lays out types of questions around any moral issue (torture not unique in this regard)-- factual questions, conceptual questions, evaluative questions.
Author's position is that it is only conceptual questions that philosophers can help with-- clarifying ideas and correcting conceptual errors only. No one should look to philosophers for evaluative expertise, author claims. "Philosophers, as such, have neither factual nor evaluative expertise. (I would argue that nobody has evaluative expertise.)"
Author also distinguishes between what is permissible by law and what is permissible morally-- how the two are different, specifically that the law has to be practical and apply in a rule-like manner.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment