Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 8
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Hubbeling, Dieneke 2016. Medical Error and Moral Luck. HEC Forum, Vol. 28, Issue. 3, p. 229.


    Srinivasan, Amia 2015. Normativity without Cartesian privilege. Philosophical Issues, Vol. 25, Issue. 1, p. 273.


    BURCH-BROWN, JOANNA M. 2014. Clues for Consequentialists. Utilitas, Vol. 26, Issue. 01, p. 105.


    van Someren Greve, Rob 2014. The value of practical usefulness. Philosophical Studies, Vol. 168, Issue. 1, p. 167.


    Archer, Alfred 2013. Supererogation and Intentions of the Agent. Philosophia, Vol. 41, Issue. 2, p. 447.


    Collins, Stephanie 2013. Collectives' Duties and Collectivization Duties. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 91, Issue. 2, p. 231.


    Lawford-Smith, Holly 2013. Non-Ideal Accessibility. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, Vol. 16, Issue. 3, p. 653.


    FELDMAN, FRED 2012. True and Useful: On the Structure of a Two Level Normative Theory. Utilitas, Vol. 24, Issue. 02, p. 151.


    ×

SUBJECTIVE RIGHTNESS

  • Holly M. Smith (a1)
  • DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0265052509990161
  • Published online: 01 June 2010
Abstract
Abstract

Twentieth century philosophers introduced the distinction between “objective rightness” and “subjective rightness” to achieve two primary goals. The first goal is to reduce the paradoxical tension between our judgments of (i) what is best for an agent to do in light of the actual circumstances in which she acts and (ii) what is wisest for her to do in light of her mistaken or uncertain beliefs about her circumstances. The second goal is to provide moral guidance to an agent who may be uncertain about the circumstances in which she acts, and hence is unable to use her standard moral principle directly in deciding what to do. This paper distinguishes two important senses of “moral guidance”; proposes criteria of adequacy for accounts of subjective rightness; canvasses existing definitions for “subjective rightness”; finds them all deficient; and proposes a new and more successful account. It argues that each comprehensive moral theory must include multiple principles of subjective rightness to address the epistemic situations of the full range of moral decision-makers, and shows that accounts of subjective rightness formulated in terms of what it would reasonable for the agent to believe cannot provide that guidance.

Copyright
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

C. D. Broad , Ethics, ed. C. Lewy (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1985), chapter 3

David Sosa , “Consequences of Consequentialism,” Mind, New Series102, no. 405 (January 1993)

Graham Oddie and Peter Menzies , “An Objectivist's Guide to Subjective Value,” Ethics 102, no. 3 (April 1992)

Absolutist Moral Theories and Uncertainty,” The Journal of Philosophy 103, no. 6 (June 2006): 267–83

Frank Jackson , “Decision-Theoretic Consequentialism and the Nearest and Dearest Objection,” Ethics 101, no. 3 (April 1991): 461–82

Fred Feldman argues, in “Actual Utility, the Objection from Impracticality, and the Move to Expected Utility,” Philosophical Studies 129 (2006): 4979

Jacob Ross , “Rejecting Ethical Deflationism,” Ethics 116 (July 2006): 742–68

Holly M. Smith , “Making Moral Decisions,” Noûs 22 (1988): 8993

Kieran Setiya , “Cognitivism about Instrumental Reason,” Ethics 117, no. 4 (July 2007): 649–73

Michael S. Moore , “Patrolling the Borders of Consequentialist Justifications,” Law and Philosophy 27 no. 1 (January 2008): 3596

John Oberdiek , “Culpability and the Definition of Deontological Constraints,” Law and Philosophy 27 (March 2008): 105–22

Robert Adams , “Involuntary Sins,” The Philosophical Review 94, no. 1 (January 1985): 332

Richard Feldman , “The Ethics of Belief,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60, no. 3 (May 2000): 667–95

Pamela Hieronymi , “Responsibility for Believing,” Synthese 161, no. 3 (April 2008): 357–73

Clyde C. Coombs , Robyn M. Dawes , and Amos Tversky , Mathematical Psychology (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1970), chapter 5

R. M. Hare , Moral Thinking: Its Levels, Method, and Point (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981)

Harry Frankfurt in “Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility,” Journal of Philosophy 66, no. 23 (December 4, 1969): 829–33

Culpable Ignorance,” The Philosophical Review 92, no. 4 (October 1983): 543–71

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Social Philosophy and Policy
  • ISSN: 0265-0525
  • EISSN: 1471-6437
  • URL: /core/journals/social-philosophy-and-policy
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×