Category: Moral Theory

Abortion, Sex, and the Limits of Morality

Posted by luno in motherhood, philosophy and sex, abortion, sex differences, male criminality, Moral Theory (Saturday June 30, 2012 at 8:43 pm)
Comments: 0

A Lecture
Bianco Luno
Editor’s note: Bianco Luno surveys and interprets some of the major philosophical literature on abortion in Part I in preparation for drawing radical lessons for the nature of morality in Part II. Thanks to J. Armstrong, Gene L., and O. Dresher for reading, discussion, and corrections. —Victor Muñoz
  φ  
Introduction
The topic
I want to talk […]

Abortion, Sex, and the Limits of Morality - Part II

Lessons for moral theory taken from the morality of abortion
  φ  
Utility and women
In the realm of ethics, the notion of rights is little more than three centuries old, that of utility less, that of virtue two millenia. But that of care we must assume is pre-historic.
There seem to be very few utilitarian philosophers who are women. […]

Stephenson: crime is a masculine statement (I)

Posted by luno in Criminality, philosophy and sex, rape, female criminality, sex differences, feminism, male criminality, Moral Theory (Sunday November 28, 2010 at 12:22 pm)
Comments: 0

Bianco Luno’s notes on June Stephenson’s Men are Not Cost-Effective

  I   |  II  |  III 

Editor’s Introduction
“Women and men do not participate equally in crime. The disparity is so extreme, ancient, and immanent that it long ago should have garnered serious attention from philosophers for what it signals about the only two kinds of moral consciousness.” So […]

On being blotted out

Posted by luno in capital punishment, Criminality, Deontology, Kant, Moral Theory, Weininger (Thursday June 25, 2009 at 9:47 am)
Comments: 0

the point of the death penalty
The meaning of capital punishment—insofar as it has a meaning and is not a reflex—is concerned with the distribution of responsibility. The field of responsibility is limited to moral agents. Constituted authorities are not moral agents. Individuals, who are, may or may not be missing the requisite nerve. Usually, they […]

Moral terrorism, aka supererogation

Posted by luno in motherhood, philosophy and sex, sex differences, Deontology, Utilitarianism, Moral Theory (Wednesday October 3, 2007 at 11:31 am)
Comments: 0

In this classic paper in the literature on the idea of supererogation (acts above and beyond moral duty), Urmson argues for recognition of a special class of moral acts that, while clearly moral, cannot be required—at least not generally. In the course of his argument, he makes explicit a masculine assumption about the feminine relation to morality. Susan Wolf reacts to this paper. Together, Urmson’s seemingly off-handed remark and Wolf’s response, are symptomatic of the deep rift in moral perspective between women and men. The underlying clash of principles were first clearly examined by Otto Weininger a century ago. Luno picks up where Weininger left off, using Urmson and Wolf as philosophical occasions.

Too much of a good thing…

Posted by luno in philosophy and sex, sex differences, feminism, Moral Theory (Wednesday September 26, 2007 at 12:22 pm)
Comments: 0

Wolf does not consider moral perfection “a model of personal well-being.” She disagrees with the assumption “that one ought to be as morally good as possible.” Either we must make our ideals more “palatable” or, as she will argue, tinker with what we mean when we affirm a moral theory. She explores what is wrong with being a moral saint.

Persons with bodies and opinions

Posted by luno in philosophy and sex, rape, prostitution, sex differences, Deontology, Kant (Friday September 14, 2007 at 1:41 pm)
Comments: 0

O’Neill addresses the Kantian moral concepts of not treating others as means (i.e., using them) and treating them positively as persons, how these are related, and finally how “an adequate understanding of what it is to treat others as persons must view them not abstractly as possibly consenting adults, but as particular men and women with limited and determinate capacities to understand or consent to proposals of action.” The Kantian moral ideal so far as it has practical application must take account of human limitations.

Types of integrity

Posted by luno in sex differences, Moral Consciousness, Deontology, Utilitarianism, feminism, Moral Theory (Thursday January 4, 2007 at 1:18 pm)
Comments: 0

Notes on Cheshire Calhoun,“Standing for Something.”
[Against the background of some contemporary conceptions of integrity as a virtue, Calhoun will argue that this virtue, whatever private merit it may have, is in the end a “master” social virtue not only because of its deployment of so many other virtues but because of its critical role in […]

An affair of honor and the darkness of hell

Posted by luno in motherhood, philosophy and sex, abortion, sex differences, Utilitarianism, Deontology, Kant (Thursday December 21, 2006 at 12:41 pm)
Comments: 0

Notes on Immanuel Kant, The Philosophy of Law (1796)
There are, however, two crimes worthy of death, in respect of which it still remains doubtful whether the Legislature have the Right to deal with them capitally.
And since they cannot be dealt with “capitally,” they cannot, on Kantian terms, quite be seen as murder.
It is the sentiment […]

When justice comes on a pretty pass

Posted by luno in political philosophy, Deontology, Kant, Moral Theory (Friday December 15, 2006 at 5:20 pm)
Comments: 0

Notes on Kant, “Theory and Practice,” part 2
From the concluding section:
It thus follows that all resistance against the supreme legislative power, all incitement of the subjects to violent expressions of discontent, all defiance which breaks out into rebellion, is the greatest and most punishable crime in a commonwealth, for it destroys its very foundations. This […]

 
Creative Commons License