In Hanoch Sheinman (ed.), Promises and Agreements: Philosophical Essays. Oxford University Press (2011)
Abstract |
This paper begins with the idea that we can learn a good deal about promising by examining the conditions and norms that govern promise- breaking. Sometimes promises are broken as a deliberate plan, other times they are broken because they are simply incompatible with other, more signifi cant moral norms, or because it becomes clear that they are impossible to keep. There are cases where people make promises that are actually incompatible with each other. Politicians, for example, often give such incompatible promises, either intentionally, or by making too many commitments, some of which turn out to be incompatible. In making such promises, agents guarantee that at least one promise be broken. Is the agent who makes incompatible promises under any obli- gation? If ‘ought’ implies ‘can,’ and promises entail obligations, then it seems that one cannot, in fact, make promises one cannot keep. This paper explores the problem by drawing analogies between incompatible promises and other promises that cannot be kept. It suggests that we can deny ‘ought’ implies ‘can’ strictly speaking, but recognize that there is a practical limit on what the agent can be called on to do. On this view, even promises to do the impossible commit the agent. Similarly, politi- cians who promise too much are still obligated to do as promised
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
Buy the book |
Find it on Amazon.com
|
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Intention, Expectation, and Promissory Obligation.Abraham Sesshu Roth - 2016 - Ethics 127 (1):88-115.
Promises and the Backward Reach of Uptake.Hallie Liberto - 2018 - American Philosophical Quarterly 55 (1):15-26.
‘Ought Implies Can’: Not So Pragmatic After All.Alex King - 2017 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 95 (3):637-661.
“Ought” Implies “Can” but Does Not Imply “Must”: An Asymmetry Between Becoming Infeasible and Becoming Overridden.Peter B. M. Vranas - 2018 - Philosophical Review 127 (4):487-514.
Similar books and articles
Promises and Rule Consequentialism.Brad Hooker - 2011 - In Hanoch Sheinman (ed.), Promises and Agreements. New York, USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 235-252.
“Natural Rights and Two Conceptions of Promising”.Peter Vallentyne - 2006 - Chicago-Kent Law Review 81 (9):9-19.
Hume on Promises and the Peculiar Act of the Mind.Rachel Cohon - 2006 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 44 (1):25-45.
Is Divorce Promise-Breaking?Elizabeth Brake - 2011 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (1):23-39.
Can Libertarians Make Promises?Alfred Mele - 2004 - In John Hyman & Helen Steward (eds.), Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement. Cambridge University Press. pp. 217-241.
The Problem with Promising.David Owens - 2011 - In H. Sheinman (ed.), Promises and Agreements: Philosophical Essays. pp. 58-79.
Ross and Utilitarianism on Promise Keeping and Lying: Self‐Evidence and the Data of Ethics.Thomas L. Carson - 2005 - Philosophical Issues 15 (1):140–157.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2011-01-21
Total views
153 ( #76,354 of 2,506,031 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #90,541 of 2,506,031 )
2011-01-21
Total views
153 ( #76,354 of 2,506,031 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #90,541 of 2,506,031 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads