首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Springer Open Choice >Enhancing Moral Conformity and Enhancing Moral Worth
【2h】

Enhancing Moral Conformity and Enhancing Moral Worth

机译:增强道德整合和道德价值

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

It is plausible that we have moral reasons to become better at conforming to our moral reasons. However, it is not always clear what means to greater moral conformity we should adopt. John Harris has recently argued that we have reason to adopt traditional, deliberative means in preference to means that alter our affective or conative states directly—that is, without engaging our deliberative faculties. One of Harris’ concerns about direct means is that they would produce only a superficial kind of moral improvement. Though they might increase our moral conformity, there is some deeper kind of moral improvement that they would fail to produce, or would produce to a lesser degree than more traditional means. I consider whether this concern might be justified by appeal to the concept of moral worth. I assess three attempts to show that, even where they were equally effective at increasing one’s moral conformity, direct interventions would be less conducive to moral worth than typical deliberative alternatives. Each of these attempts is inspired by Kant’s views on moral worth. Each, I argue, fails.
机译:我们有道德理由可以更好地符合我们的道德理由,这是合理的。但是,并不总是清楚我们应该采取什么措施来实现更大的道德整合。约翰·哈里斯(John Harris)最近争辩说,我们有理由优先采用传统的协商手段,而不是直接改变我们的情感或友好状态的手段,也就是说,无需参与我们的协商能力。哈里斯对直接手段的关注之一是,它们只会产生一种表面上的道德改善。尽管它们可以增进我们的道德整合,但在道德上还有一些更深层次的改进,他们将无法产生,或者产生的程度要小于传统手段。我考虑是否可以通过诉诸道德价值概念来证明这种关注。我评估了三种尝试,这些尝试表明,即使在提高人们的道德顺从性方面同样有效,直接干预也比典型的协商性选择不利于道德价值。这些尝试均受康德关于道德价值的观点的启发。我认为,每个失败。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号