An introduction to contemporary metaethics.

Der moralische Kontraktualismus ist neben der kantischen und utilitaristischen Tradition die dritte Haupttradition einer aufgeklärten Moralphilosophie. Seine Kernthese besagt, daß moralische Normen und Forderungen legitim sind, wenn die Betroffenen sich aus ihren Interessen heraus auf die Etablierung dieser Normen hätten einigen können. Eine vernünftige Moral ist demnach, obwohl sie Freiheitsbeschränkungen verlangt, zum gegenseitigen Vorteil der Einzelnen. Die Autoren des Bandes diskutieren im Lichte neuerer Arbeiten die Vorzüge und Schwierigkeiten der moralischen Vertragstheorie. Zentrale Themen sind der Begriff der Moral, das Problem (...) der moralischen Normativität, der Zusammenhang von Moral und Interesse, von Moral und Rationalität sowie die Frage, welche moralischen Normen eine kontraktualistische Theorie konkret zu begründen vermag. (shrink)

This major study of Hobbes's political philosophy draws on recent developments in game and decision theory to explore whether the thrust of the argument in Leviathan, that it is in the interests of the people to create a ruler with absolute power, can be shown to be cogent. Professor Hampton has written a book of vital importance to political philosophers, political and social scientists, and intellectual historians.

Peter Stemmer has developed an elegant and impressive theory of normativity and morality. In this article, I try to show that he does not achieve two goals he set for himself. First, his theory does not capture the categorical bindingness of moral demands, even in Stemmer’s own interpretation of categorical bindingness: it does not show that wemustfollow moral demands no matter what our personal goals and desires are. Second, just because it would be rational to establish positive moralities in a (...) hypothetical pre-moral scenario, it does not follow – and Stemmer does not establish – that only positive moralities that are in the interest of all members (and contain a prohibition on oppression) arelegitimate. For that reason, his contractarian theory collapses into relativism. (shrink)

I THE NATURE OF MAN To understand morals and politics, understand man. Leviathan , 'that mortal god, to which we owe under the immortal God, our peace and ...

Norbert Hoerster has tried to show on the basis of what I call special and general interests that it is rational to endorse moral judgements. I argue that Hoerster’s attempt to vindicate the rationality of moral judgements fails. By appealing to special interests Hoerster can only establish the rationality of endorsing judgements that – by Hoerster’s own standards – are not moral judgements because they do not pass the test of generalization. While the appeal to general interests, on the other (...) hand, indeed establishes the rationality of endorsing judgements that pass the test of generalization, it does so only for some but not all people; for this reason, the vindicated judgements do not qualify as moral judgements either. (shrink)

What are preferences and are they reasons for action? Is it rational to cooperate with others even if that entails acting against one's preferences? The dominant position in philosophy on the topic of practical rationality is that one acts so as to maximize the satisfaction of one's preferences. This view is most closely associated with the work of David Gauthier, and in this collection of essays some of the most innovative philosophers working in this field explore the controversies surrounding Gauthier's (...) position. Several essays argue against influential conceptions of preference, while others suggest that received conceptions of rational action misidentify the normative significance of rules and practices. This collection will be of particular interest to philosophers of social theory and to reflective social scientists in such fields as economics, political science and psychology. (shrink)

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), whose current reputation rests largely on his political philosophy, was a thinker with wide ranging interests. In philosophy, he defended a range of materialist, nominalist, and empiricist views against Cartesian and Aristotelian alternatives. In physics, his work was influential on Leibniz, and lead him into disputes with Boyle and the experimentalists of the early Royal Society. In history, he translated Thucydides's History of the Peloponnesian War into English, and later wrote his own history of the Long Parliament. (...) In mathematics he was less successful, and is best remembered for his repeated unsuccessful attempts to square the circle. But despite that, Hobbes was a serious and prominent participant in the intellectual life of his time. (shrink)

How can legal norms be morally evaluated? In this paper we discuss and defend consequentialism about legal norms. According to this doctrine, the legitimacy of legal norms depends entirely on the consequences of the norms’ validity. Consequentialism about legal norms shares the advantages of both act- and rule-consequentialism while avoiding the respective disadvantages. In particular, consequentialism about legal norms has prima-facie plausibility like act-consequentialism and for similar reasons: it qualifies as a version of collective act-consequentialism. At the same time, the (...) implications of consequentialism about legal norms cohere with common-sense morality because, like rule-consequentialism, consequentialism about legal norms takes into account the motivational limits of human agents. (shrink)

This paper offers a critique of David Gauthier’s contractarian moral theory. I point out morally counter-intuitive implications of Gauthier’s theory – for example, with respect to societies with slavery or concerning the protection of animals – as well as theoretically unattractive features, such as the overly optimistic assumption of translucent agents. However, contractarian moral theories can be improved by correcting the theoretically unattractive features. Moreover, though some morally counter-intuitive implications cannot be avoided, whether we should accept these implications ultimately depends (...) on whether an instrumentalist account of practical reason is defensible and how morality relates to practical reason. Thus, contractarian moral theories cannot be refuted as easily as one might think at first. (shrink)

It is claimed that some important moral rules — more precisely: the social establishment of such rules — can best be argued for in terms of hypothetical imperatives, addressed to each member of the society in question. The main presuppositions of this conception of morality are analysed and the implications of it for the relations between morality on the one hand and such things as prudence, sanctions, and equality on the other are examined.

Moralische Normen sind in den Augen derer, die sie zur Geltung bringen und ihre Befolgung von anderen fordern, keine Machtnormen, sondern gerechtfertigte Normen. Sie schränken den Freiheitsspielraum der Menschen ein, aber sie tun dies gerechtfertigterweise, und das heißt: auf moralisch unbedenkliche Weise. Moralische Normen genügen damit selbst einem moralischen Maßstab, sie entsprechen selbst einer – höherstufigen – moralischen Norm. Wo kommt diese höherstufige moralische Norm her, und was ist ihr Inhalt? Der Aufsatz behandelt diese Fragen im Rahmen einer interessenfundierten Moralkonzeption. (...) Und er prüft die traditionelle Auffassung, eine Norm und ihre Durchsetzung sei dann gerechtfertigt, wenn sie im Interesse aller Betroffenen liege. (shrink)

Der moralische Kontraktualismus hat mit zwei elementaren Einwänden zu kämpfen, die die Vertragsidee selbst betreffen und damit die innere Schlüssigkeit der Konzeption in Frage stellen. Der erste Einwand besagt, ein moralgenerierender Vertrag sei nie geschlossen worden, der zweite, die Idee, ein Vertrag kreiere die moralische Normativität, sei zirkulär oder führe in einen infiniten Regress. Der Kontraktualismus kann sich gegen beide Einwände verteidigen, indem er sich vom faktischen zum hypothetischen Kontraktualismus wandelt und die Vorstellung, die Legitimität moralischer Normen resultiere aus einem (...) Vertragsschluss, einem Versprechen oder anderen legitimitätsstiftenden Handlungen der Betroffenen, verwirft. Eine moralische Norm ist vielmehr dann legitim, wenn ihr eine bestimmte Interessenkonfiguration zugrunde liegt, eine Interessenkonfiguration nämlich genau von der Art, wie sie einem Vertrag vorausgeht. Ein in dieser Weise modifizierter Kontraktualismus bietet eine interessenfundierte Moralkonzeption, die gleichwohl unsere tiefverwurzelte Überzeugung, dass der Kern der Moral moralische Rechte, moralische Pflichten und moralische Forderungen sind, verständlich zu machen vermag. (shrink)