Advertisement

Constrained by Reason, Transformed by Love: Murdoch on the Standard of Proof

  • Carla Bagnoli
Chapter
Part of the Philosophers in Depth book series (PID)

Abstract

According to Iris Murdoch, the chief experience in morality is loving attention. Her view calls into question the Kantian account of the standard of moral authority, and ultimately denies that reason might provide moral discernment, validate moral experience, or drive us toward moral progress. Like Kant, Murdoch defines the moral experience as the subjective experience of freedom, which resists any reductivist approach. Unlike Kant, she thinks that this free agency is unprincipled. Some of her arguments are based on an oversimplified account of Kant’s theory of reflective agency and discount the discipline of reason, thereby nullifying its practical import. However, Murdoch’s work offers a distinctive view of the standard of proof as a “moral proof”, which rehabilitates the transformative power of love and represents a genuine alternative to theories of practical reason as well as to reductivist empiricist views of the mind.

References

  1. Bagnoli Carla. 2003. Respect and Loving Attention. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 33: 483–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ———. 2011a. The Exploration of Moral Life. In Iris Murdoch, Philosopher, ed. J. Broackes, 193–221. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. ———. 2011b. Emotions and the Categorical Authority of Moral Reasons. In Morality and the Emotions, ed. C. Bagnoli, 62–81. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. ———. 2018. Respect and the Dynamics of Finitude. In Respect, ed. Richard Dean and Oliver Sensen. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Accepted and forthcoming.Google Scholar
  5. Baxley, Anne Margaret. 2010. Kant’s Theory of Virtue: The Value of Autocracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blum, Lawrence. 1991. Moral Perception and Particularity. Ethics 101 (4): 701–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diamond, Cora. 2014. Murdoch Off the Map, or Taking Empiricism Back from the Empiricists. Conference paper presented at Is Philosophy Nonsense? Lecture Series; Funded by the Forry and Micken Fund in Philosophy and Science. Amherst College, 4-10-2014.Google Scholar
  8. Doris, John, and Stephen P. Stich. 2005. As a Matter of Fact: Empirical Perspectives on Ethics. In The Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy, ed. Frank Jackson and Michael Smith. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. ———. 2006. Moral Psychology: Empirical Approaches. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.Google Scholar
  10. Engstrom, Stephen. 2002. The Inner Freedom of Virtue. In Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals: Interpretative Essays, ed. Mark Timmons, 289–315. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Frankfurt, Harry. 2004. Reasons of Love. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Friedman, Michael. 1992. Kant and the Exact Sciences. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Grenberg, Jeanine. 2010. What Is the Enemy of Virtue? In Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide, ed. Lara Denis, 152–170. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Guyer, Paul. 2010. Moral Feelings in the Metaphysics of Morals. In Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide, ed. Lara Denis, 130–152. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Jordan, Jessy E.G. 2014. Reconsidering Iris Murdoch’s Moral Realism. Journal of Value Inquiry 48: 371–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lloyd, Genevieve. 1982. Iris Murdoch on the Ethical Significance of Truth. Philosophy and Literature 6 (1–2): 62–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Merritt, Melissa McBay. 2017. Love, Respect, and Individuals: Murdoch as a Guide to Kantian Ethics. European Journal of Philosophy. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejop.12280.
  18. Milosavljevic-Vujosevic, Marijana. forthcoming. The Kantian Capacity for Moral Self-Control: Abstraction at Two Levels. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie.Google Scholar
  19. Millgram, Elijah. 2004. Kantian Crystallization. Ethics 114 (3): 511–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Murdoch, Iris. 1974. The Sacred and the Profane Love Machine. London: Chatto and Windus.Google Scholar
  21. ———. 1997. Existentialists and Mystics. Edited by P. Conradi. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  22. Nussbaum, Martha C. 1996. Love and Vision: Iris Murdoch on Eros and the Individual. In Iris Murdoch and the Search for Human Goodness. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. ———. 2011. Faint with Secret Knowledge: Love and Vision in Murdoch’s Black Prince. In Iris Murdoch, Philosopher, ed. J. Broackes, 135–154. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. O’Neill, Onora. 1989. Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Reath, Andrews. 2006. Agency and Autonomy in Kant’s Moral Theory. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Velleman, J. David. 1999. Love as a Moral Emotion. Ethics 109 (2): 338–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. References to Kant’s works refer to the Prussian Academy edition and are given using the following abbreviations:Google Scholar
  28. A Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of ViewGoogle Scholar
  29. C1 Critique of Pure ReasonGoogle Scholar
  30. C2 Critique of Practical ReasonGoogle Scholar
  31. G Groundwork of the Metaphysics of MoralsGoogle Scholar
  32. LE Lectures on EthicsGoogle Scholar
  33. MM Metaphysics of MoralsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carla Bagnoli
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Modena and Reggio EmiliaModenaItaly
  2. 2.University of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations