Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (3):231-258 (2003)

Abstract
: Biomedical ethicists often assume that common morality constitutes a largely consistent normative system. This premise is not taken for granted in general normative ethics. This paper entertains the possibility of inconsistency within common morality and explores methodological implications. Assuming common morality to be inconsistent casts new light on the debate between principlists and descriptivists. One can view the two approaches as complementary attempts to evade or transcend that inconsistency. If common morality proves to be inconsistent, then principlists might have reason to prefer a less pluralistic theory, thereby moving closer to descriptivism. Descriptivists, by contrast, might want to qualify their claim to accommodate all of people's basic moral convictions. Finally, both camps might wish to adopt a more revisionist posture, accepting that an adequate ethical theory occasionally will contradict some of people's deepest moral convictions. Proper application of the method of reflective equilibrium, to which both descriptivists and principlists claim allegiance, may entail greater openness to revisionism than either camp admits.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1353/ken.2003.0018
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,114
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Hippocratic, Religious, and Secular Ethics: The Points of Conflict.Robert M. Veatch - 2012 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 33 (1):33-43.
Exploring Responsibility Rationales in Research and Development.Neelke Doorn - 2012 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 37 (3):180-209.
Living with Pirates.Rebecca Kukla - 2014 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 23 (1):75-85.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Justifying Group-Specific Common Morality.Carson Strong - 2008 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (1):1-15.
The Hedgehog and the Borg: Common Morality in Bioethics.John D. Arras - 2009 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):11-30.
Common Morality and Moral Reform.K. A. Wallace - 2009 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):55-68.
Common Morality and Computing.Bernard Gert - 1999 - Ethics and Information Technology 1 (1):53-60.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
304 ( #34,120 of 2,499,060 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #419,059 of 2,499,060 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes