Subjective Deontology and the Duty to Gather Information

Ethics 127 (1):257-271 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Holly Smith has recently argued that Subjective Deontological Moral Theories (SDM theories) cannot adequately account for agents’ duties to gather information. I defend SDM theories against this charge and argue that they can account for agents’ duties to inform themselves. Along the way, I develop some principles governing how SDM theories, and deontological moral theories in general, should assign ‘deontic value’ or ‘deontic weight’ to particular actions.

Similar books and articles

Deontology and Defeat.Michael Bergmann - 2000 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60 (1):87-102.
Deontology and defeat.Michael Bergmann - 2000 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60 (1):87-102.
V—What's Wrong with ‘Deontology’?Jens Timmermann - 2015 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 115 (1pt1):75-92.
Open-Mindedness and the Duty to Gather Evidence.Neil Levy - 2006 - Public Affairs Quarterly 20 (1):55-66.
Why There are No Epistemic Duties.Chase B. Wrenn - 2007 - Dialogue: The Canadian Philosophical Review 46 (1):115-136.
Deontology.Stephen L. Darwall (ed.) - 2003 - Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-09-10

Downloads
337 (#59,715)

6 months
78 (#62,023)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Philip Swenson
William & Mary

Citations of this work

The morality of creating and eliminating duties.Holly M. Smith & David E. Black - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (12):3211-3240.

Add more citations

References found in this work

A paradox of promising.Holly M. Smith - 1997 - Philosophical Review 106 (2):153-196.
A Paradox of Promising.Holly M. Smith - 1997 - Philosophical Review 106 (2):153-196.

Add more references