...
首页> 外文期刊>Bioethics >Why moral philosophers are not and should not be moral experts
【24h】

Why moral philosophers are not and should not be moral experts

机译:为什么道德哲学家不是也不应该成为道德专家

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Professional philosophers are members of bioethical committees and regulatory bodies in areas of interest to bioethicists. This suggests they possess moral expertise even if they do not exercise it directly and without constraint. Moral expertise is defined, and four arguments given in support of scepticism about their possession of such expertise are considered and rejected: the existence of extreme disagreement between moral philosophers about moral matters; the lack of a means clearly to identify moral experts; that expertise cannot be claimed in that which lacks objectivity; and that ordinary people do not follow the advice of moral experts. I offer a better reason for scepticism grounded in the relation between moral philosophy and common-sense morality: namely that modern moral philosophy views even a developed moral theory as ultimately anchored in common-sense morality, that set of basic moral precepts which ordinary individuals have command of and use to regulate their own lives. Even if moral philosophers do nevertheless have a limited moral expertise, in that they alone can fully develop a set of moral judgments, I sketch reasons - grounded in the values of autonomy and of democracy - why moral philosophers should not wish non-philosophers to defer to their putative expertise.
机译:专业的哲学家是生物伦理学家感兴趣的领域中的生物伦理委员会和监管机构的成员。这表明,即使他们不直接且不受限制地行使道德专长,他们仍具有道德专长。定义了道德专长,并考虑和拒绝了支持他们是否拥有这种专长的怀疑论的四个论点:道德哲学家之间在道德问题上存在极端分歧;缺乏明确确定道德专家的手段;不能以缺乏客观性的方式来主张专业知识;以及普通人不听从道德专家的建议。我为基于道德哲学和常识道德之间的关系的怀疑主义提供了更好的理由:即现代道德哲学甚至将发达的道德理论最终视作常识道德的基础,即普通人所拥有的基本道德戒律掌握和使用以调节自己的生活。即使道德哲学家确实具有有限的道德专长,仅凭他们自己就可以充分发展一套道德判断,但我还是根据自主权和民主的价值观来勾勒出原因-道德哲学家为什么不希望非哲学家推迟他们公认的专业知识。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号