Abstract

This response to “Morality or Moralism?” by Émilie Hache and Bruno Latour, while accepting the plausibility and importance of their critique of moralism in the name of morality, identifies a number of questionable steps and assumptions in their development of it. Mulhall's response questions an ambiguity in their specifications of what morality and moralism are—an unexplained tendency on their part to occlude distinctively nonhuman animal life in favor of the inanimate when advocating a concern for the nonhuman, and what appears to be a misreading of Michel Serres