A Non-reductive Naturalist Approach to Moral Explanation

Dissertation, University of Michigan (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Many philosophers insist that moral facts or properties play no role in explaining (non-normative) natural phenomena. The problem of moral explanation has raised metaphysical, semantic and epistemic challenges to contemporary moral realism. In my dissertation, I attempt to vindicate the explanatory efficacy of moral properties, while at the same time respecting the autonomy and normativity of morality. In doing so, I will advocate a sort of non-reductive ethical naturalism, according to which moral properties are natural properties (in the sense that they are open to empirical investigation), and yet remain irreducible to non-normative natural properties, such as psychological, biological, and sociological properties. More specifically, I develop a form of moral functionalism to vindicate moral explanation. Moral functionalism understands moral properties as second-order, functional properties, the natures of which are characterized in terms of functional roles. My version of moral functionalism has two particular features. First, it is a form of a posteriori moral functionalism. The moral theory used to characterize the functional roles of moral properties can only be discovered by appeal to empirical investigation (for this reason, my a posteriori version of moral functionalism is a sort of ethical naturalism). Second, it is a holistic version of moral functionalism. The functional role of a moral property cannot be identified solely in terms of non-normative properties; rather, it essentially involves a network of connections to both non-normative and normative properties (for this reason, my holistic version of moral functionalism is a sort of ethical anti-reductionism). It is important to note that the question of whether moral properties have explanatory power bears on the question of what explanation or explanatoriness is. In my dissertation, I attempt to show that my vindication of moral explanation presupposes a plausible account of explanation. Obviously I cannot discuss all theories of explanation; my dissertation will rather focus on two influential accounts of explanation: the causalist model and the unificationist model. Then I argue that moral properties understood as functional properties of the kind I have described can do causal-explanatory work and play a distinctive unifying role.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,745

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A Unificationist Vindication of Moral Explanation.Lei Zhong - 2011 - Philosophical Forum 42 (2):131-146.
Moral explanation.Brad Majors - 2006 - Philosophy Compass 2 (1):1–15.
Realist Ethical Naturalism for Ethical Non-Naturalists.Ryan Stringer - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 175 (2):339-362.
The Ontological Status of Ethics.Bindu Madhok - 1991 - Dissertation, Brown University
Two kinds of naturalism in ethics.Neil Sinclair - 2006 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 9 (4):417 - 439.
Explaining right and wrong.Geoffrey Ferrari - 2008 - Dissertation, University of Oxford
The price of non-reductive moral realism.Ralph Wedgwood - 1999 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2 (3):199-215.
Moral Functionalism and Moral Nonnaturalism.Lei Zhong - 2023 - Journal of Value Inquiry 57 (1):131-147.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-08-05

Downloads
32 (#127,447)

6 months
11 (#1,140,922)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

A defence of the evolutionary debunking argument.Man Him Ip - 2021 - Dissertation, University of Birmingham

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references