Abstract

The 'individualizability objection' to the universalizability thesis asserts that the thesis is trivial because both the reason for a singular moral judgment and the corresponding universal principle may be so individualized that they apply to only one person. Purported reasons which are thus individualized, However, Fail to fulfill two general requirements of a reason: specificity and relevance. If the reasons do fulfill these requirements and also seem to support the individualizability objection, Than either they are logically comparative, In which case they apply to more than one person in a proportional way, Or they indicate unique properties which are nonetheless similar to those of other persons