Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21 (2):311-327 (2018)

Authors
Hugo Viciana
Institute for Advanced Social Studies (IESA-CSIC)
Abstract
Bernard Williams proposed his relativism of distance based on the recognition “that others are at varying distances from us”. Recent work in moral psychology and experimental philosophy highlights the prevalence of folk relativism in relation to spatial and temporal distance. However, Williams’ relativism of distance as well as recent empirical findings which seem to support some of Williams’ main ideas on this issue have received scant attention. In this article, we would like to focus on the phenomenon of moral relativism regarding spatiotemporal distance as an entry point to the nature of folk moral relativism and the methodology of meta-ethics. To do so, we first introduce Williams’ relativism of distance. Then we compare Williams’ approach on this matter to recent experimental approaches on folk relativism. On this score the main result is that Williams’ proposal is consistent with several well-established insights on the experimental study of folk relativism. Williams’ relativism of distance is not only empirically plausible, but it is also of relevance for shaping the methodology of an empirically informed meta-ethics. We close this paper by stressing this methodological contribution.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10677-018-9864-z
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: 70,079
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

Internal and External Reasons.Bernard Williams - 1979 - In Ross Harrison (ed.), Rational Action. Cambridge University Press. pp. 101-113.
Moral Relativism Defended.Gilbert Harman - 1975 - Philosophical Review 84 (1):3-22.
Review of E Thics and the Limits of Philosophy.Thomas Nagel - 1986 - Journal of Philosophy 83 (6):351-360.

View all 29 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Moral Relativism.Christopher Gowans - 2015 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Modern Moral Relativism.Christian Miller - 2016 - In Todd Shackelford & Viviana Weekes-Shackelford (eds.), Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science. Springer.
Relativism, Realism, and Reflection.John Tasioulas - 1998 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 41 (4):377 – 410.
An Approach to Relativism.Thomas L. Carson - 1999 - Teaching Philosophy 22 (2):161-184.
Two Kinds of Moral Relativism.John J. Tilley - 1995 - Journal of Value Inquiry 29 (2):187-192.
I—Miranda Fricker: The Relativism of Blame and Williams's Relativism of Distance.Miranda Fricker - 2010 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 84 (1):151-177.
Rorty and Moral Relativism.Christian B. Miller - 2002 - European Journal of Philosophy 10 (3):354–374.
Moral Relativism: Aspects and Principles.Mohammad Ali Shomali - 2009 - Journal of Philosophical Theological Research 11 (42):56-77.
Cultural Relativism.John J. Tilley - 2000 - Human Rights Quarterly 22 (2):501–547.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-01-22

Total views
30 ( #380,960 of 2,506,017 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #170,037 of 2,506,017 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes