Universality as a Feature of Moral Phenomena

The paper deals with some problems philosophers face in their attempts to conceptualize the universality of moral phenomena. In the first stage of the research the author evaluates Ruben Apressyan’s claim that moral universality is ‘really heterogeneous’. Starting from the moral philosophy of Richard Hare, he shows that different manifestations of moral universality turn out to be not a heterogeneous complex but a coherent and harmonious system. In the second stage the author demonstrates that requirements resulting from the universality of moral phenomena are not identical to the fundamental moral imperative ‘promote the good of others’. This imperative could be inferred from the universalizability of moral evaluations only if an agent putting himself into the shoes of a recipient of his action completely identified himself with the other person. Though such a complete identification blocks any normative consequences of the aforementioned thought experiment. In the third stage the author proves the thesis that the universality of requirements generates in the moral sphere the strong presumption in favour of highly general principles. This presumption should be considered as one more definitional feature of morality.

Keywords

normative content of morality, universality, universalizability, impartiality, generality, R.M. Hare, J.L. Mackie

Received

11.12.2018

Publication date

19.12.2018

Cite Download pdf To download PDF you should sign in

GOST	Prokofyev A. Universality as a Feature of Moral Phenomena // Voprosy filosofii – 2018. – Issue 11 C. 47-56 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://ras.jes.su/vphil/s004287440001893-7-1-en (circulation date: 18.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S004287440001893-7
MLA	Prokofyev, Andrey V "Universality as a Feature of Moral Phenomena." Voprosy filosofii 11 (2018):47-56. DOI: 10.31857/S004287440001893-7
APA	Prokofyev A. (2018). Universality as a Feature of Moral Phenomena. Voprosy filosofii (11), pp.47-56 DOI: 10.31857/S004287440001893-7

Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Kant I. Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. Russian translation.

2. Apressyan, Ruben G. (2016) ‘The Phenomenon of Universality in Ethics: Forms of Conceptualization’, Voprosy Filosoﬁi, Vol. 8 (2016), pp. 79–88 (in Russian).

3. Gert, Bernard (1995) ‘Moral Impartiality’, Midwest Studies in Philosophy, Vol. 20, Issue 1, pp. 102–128.

4. Guseynov, Abdusalam A. (2014) ‘Morality in the Light of Negative Ethics’, ed. Zubets O., Morality: Diversity of Concepts and Meanings. A Festschrift for the 75-th birthday of Abdusalam Guseynov, Alfa-M, Moscow, pp. 13–34.

5. Hare, Richard M. (1963) Freedom and Reason, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

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

7. Hare, Richard M. (1989). Essays in Ethical Theory, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

8. Hare, Richard M. (1997) Sorting out Ethics, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

9. Hare, Richard M. (1998) Essays on Political Morality, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

10. Heyd, David (1982) Supererogation: Its Status in Ethical Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

11. Mackie, John L. (1990) Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong, Penguin Books, London.

12. Prokofiev, Andrey V. (2014) ‘Perfect and Imperfect Rights and Duties: the Interpretation of Frances Hutcheson’, Filosofskie Nauki, Vol. 11 (2014), pp. 54–63 (in Russian).

13. Singer, Marcus G. (1985) ‘Universalizability and the Generalization Principle’, eds. N.T. Potter and M. Timmons, Morality and Universality: Essays on Ethical Universalizability, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 47–74.

14. Wattles, Jeffrey (1996) The Golden Rule, Oxford University Press, New York (Russian translation 2016).