The Methods of Ethics
The paper begins with an account of the intellectual background to Henry Sidgwick’s writing of his Methods of Ethics and an analysis of what Sidgwick meant by a ‘method’. His broad distinction between three main ethical theories – egoism, consequentialism, and deontology – is elucidated and accepte...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Firenze University Press
2019-03-01
|
Series: | Phenomenology and Mind |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://oaj.fupress.net/index.php/pam/article/view/7322 |
id |
doaj-7771be9aa69646b9ada466887454aff1 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-7771be9aa69646b9ada466887454aff12020-11-25T03:18:08ZengFirenze University PressPhenomenology and Mind2280-78532239-40282019-03-011510.13128/Phe_Mi-24971The Methods of EthicsRoger Crisp0University of Oxford The paper begins with an account of the intellectual background to Henry Sidgwick’s writing of his Methods of Ethics and an analysis of what Sidgwick meant by a ‘method’. His broad distinction between three main ethical theories – egoism, consequentialism, and deontology – is elucidated and accepted. Sidgwick’s different forms of intuitionism are explained, as are his criteria for testing the ‘certainty’ of a potentially self-evident belief. Section 3 discusses dogmatic intuitionism (common-sense morality systematized) and Sidgwick’s own view, in the light of his requirement for precision in ethics. The final section concerns the implications of Sidgwick’s position on disagreement for ethical theory. It is suggested that we have some knowledge in ethics, on which most converge, but not much. The paper concludes with a recommendation for a more eirenic and less dogmatic approach to philosophical ethics. https://oaj.fupress.net/index.php/pam/article/view/7322Henry Sidgwickethical methodologyethical intuitionismmoral disagreement |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Roger Crisp |
spellingShingle |
Roger Crisp The Methods of Ethics Phenomenology and Mind Henry Sidgwick ethical methodology ethical intuitionism moral disagreement |
author_facet |
Roger Crisp |
author_sort |
Roger Crisp |
title |
The Methods of Ethics |
title_short |
The Methods of Ethics |
title_full |
The Methods of Ethics |
title_fullStr |
The Methods of Ethics |
title_full_unstemmed |
The Methods of Ethics |
title_sort |
methods of ethics |
publisher |
Firenze University Press |
series |
Phenomenology and Mind |
issn |
2280-7853 2239-4028 |
publishDate |
2019-03-01 |
description |
The paper begins with an account of the intellectual background to Henry Sidgwick’s writing of his Methods of Ethics and an analysis of what Sidgwick meant by a ‘method’. His broad distinction between three main ethical theories – egoism, consequentialism, and deontology – is elucidated and accepted. Sidgwick’s different forms of intuitionism are explained, as are his criteria for testing the ‘certainty’ of a potentially self-evident belief. Section 3 discusses dogmatic intuitionism (common-sense morality systematized) and Sidgwick’s own view, in the light of his requirement for precision in ethics. The final section concerns the implications of Sidgwick’s position on disagreement for ethical theory. It is suggested that we have some knowledge in ethics, on which most converge, but not much. The paper concludes with a recommendation for a more eirenic and less dogmatic approach to philosophical ethics.
|
topic |
Henry Sidgwick ethical methodology ethical intuitionism moral disagreement |
url |
https://oaj.fupress.net/index.php/pam/article/view/7322 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT rogercrisp themethodsofethics AT rogercrisp methodsofethics |
_version_ |
1724628669095215104 |