Advertisement

The Journal of Value Inquiry

, Volume 48, Issue 2, pp 235–245 | Cite as

Gibbardian Humility: Moral Fallibility and Moral Smugness

  • James Lenman
Article

Those whose Way is not the same cannot take counsel together.

Confucius, Analects XV, 40

Quasi-Realism and Fundamental Disagreement: Egan’s Problem

I believe that it is wrong to open your boiled egg at the big end. You believe that it is not wrong to open your egg at the big end. We are at an impasse. The impasse might not be deep. One of us might just be wrong on some matter of prosaic nonnormative fact. But perhaps that is not the case. Even if we both came to be fully informed about all relevant facts, our disagreement might persist. Perhaps other rational means are available to resolve our disagreement. Perhaps if I became more sensitive, more imaginative, more considerate of others’ needs, I would change my mind. And perhaps, by my own present lights, one’s moral sensibility is improved by being changed in these ways, so that this would be, again by my own present lights, a change for the better. Perhaps your contrary view would not prove robust in circumstances where you had to...

Keywords

Moral Belief Moral Community Moral Sensibility Moral Truth Fundamental Disagreement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

The Analects of Confucius

  1. Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics.Google Scholar
  2. Simon Blackburn: Spreading the Word: Groundings in the Philosophy of Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984).Google Scholar
  3. Simon Blackburn: Ruling Passions: A Theory of Practical Reasoning (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998).Google Scholar
  4. Simon Blackburn: “Truth and A Priori Possibility; Egan’s Charge Against Quasi-Realism” in Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87, 2009, pp. 201–213.Google Scholar
  5. John M. Doris and Alexandra Pakias: “How to Argue About Disagreement: Evaluative Diversity and Moral Realism” in Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (ed.): Moral Psychology. Volume 2: The Cognitive Science of Morality: Intuition and Diversity (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008), pp. 303–331.Google Scholar
  6. Andy Egan: “Quasi-Realism and Fundamental Moral Error” in Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85, 2007, pp. 205–219.Google Scholar
  7. Stephen Finlay: “The Error in the Error Theory” in Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86, 2008, pp 347–368.Google Scholar
  8. Allan Gibbard: Wise Choices, Apt Feelings: A Theory of Normative Judgment (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990).Google Scholar
  9. Allan Gibbard: Thinking How to Live (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003).Google Scholar
  10. Allan Gibbard: “How Much Realism?” in Oxford Studies in Metaethics 6, 2011, pp. 33–51.Google Scholar
  11. David Hume: A Treatise of Human Nature (eds. Norton and Norton) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).Google Scholar
  12. James Lenman: “Ethics Without Errors”, in Ratio 26, 2013, pp. 391–409.Google Scholar
  13. Thomas Nagel, The Last Word (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997).Google Scholar
  14. Jonas Olson: “In Defense of Moral Error Theory” in Michael Brady (ed.), New Waves in Metaethics (Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan, 2011), pp. 62–84.Google Scholar
  15. C.L. Stevenson: Ethics and Language (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1944).Google Scholar
  16. Sharon Street: “A Darwinian Dilemma for Realist Theories of Value” in Philosophical Studies 127, 2006, pp. 109–166.Google Scholar
  17. Sharon Street: “Mind-Independence Without the Mystery: Why Quasi-Realists Can’t Have it Both Ways” in Oxford Studies in Metaethics 6, 2011, pp. 1–32.Google Scholar
  18. Bernard Williams: Internal and External Reasons” in his Moral Luck (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), pp. 101–113.Google Scholar
  19. Bernard Williams: Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy (London: Fontana/Collins, 1985).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations