The Debate on Impartiality: An Introduction

Musschenga, Albert
January 2005
Ethical Theory & Moral Practice;Jan2005, Vol. 8 Issue 1/2, p1
Academic Journal
Comments on a debate about impartiality as one of the defining characteristics of right actions and morally good persons. Role of impartiality in metaethical literature as the central characteristic of morality; Justification of the view of morality to understand the basis of moral evaluation; Implication of self-regarding tendencies in becoming a moral person.


Related Articles

  • Constituting the polity, constituting the demos: on the place of the all affected interests principle in democratic theory and in resolving the democratic boundary problem. Owen, David // Ethics & Global Politics;2012, Vol. 5 Issue 3, p129 

    This essay considers the role of the 'all affected interests' principle in democratic theory, focusing on debates concerning its form, substance and relationship to the resolution of the democratic boundary problem. It begins by defending an 'all actually affected' formulation of the principle...

  • The Structural Competence of Contractualism. Paletta, Douglas // Journal of Value Inquiry;Sep2014, Vol. 48 Issue 3, p437 

    The article focuses on contractualism. It states that there is redundancy in contractualism as it determines whether an act was justifiable. It discusses how contractualism stand against theories related to morality and contractualism's link with inadequacy and objections related to source of...

  • COHERENTISM AND CONTEXTUALISM AND THE PROCESS OF JUSTIFICATION.  // Conference Proceedings -- National Communication Association/Ame;1987 Argument & Critical Practices, p215 

    The article focuses on the use of contextualism and coherentism in the analysis of justification in argumentation. Contextualism is a theoretical rationale for the justification of belief and action while coherentism offers a means of assessing the worth of the information in light of what is...

  • Sobre el valor de la amistad y su con?icto potencial con la moral. Una revisión del debate contemporáneo. DAGUERRE, MARTÍN // Diánoia;may2010, Vol. 55 Issue 64, p47 

    No abstract available.

  • The Move from "Good" to "Ought" in Environmental Ethics. Nolt, John // Environmental Ethics;Winter2006, Vol. 28 Issue 4, p355 

    The move from "good" to "ought," a premise form found in many justifications of environmental ethics, is itself in need of justification. Of the potential moves from "good" to "ought" surveyed, some have considerable promise and others less or none. Those without much promise include...

  • Movin' on up: higher-level requirements and inferential justification. Tucker, Chris // Philosophical Studies;Feb2012, Vol. 157 Issue 3, p323 

    Does inferential justification require the subject to be aware that her premises support her conclusion? Externalists tend to answer 'no' and internalists tend to answer 'yes'. In fact, internalists often hold the strong higher-level requirement that an argument justifies its conclusion only if...

  • Access Externalism. Gibbons, John // Mind;Jan2006, Vol. 115 Issue 457, p19 

    This paper argues for externalism about justification on the basis of thought experiments. I present cases in which two individuals are intrinsically and introspectively indistinguishable and in which intuitively, one is justified in believing that p while the other is not. I also examine an...

  • Internalist and externalist aspects of justification in scientific inquiry. Staley, Kent; Cobb, Aaron // Synthese;Oct2011, Vol. 182 Issue 3, p475 

    While epistemic justification is a central concern for both contemporary epistemology and philosophy of science, debates in contemporary epistemology about the nature of epistemic justification have not been discussed extensively by philosophers of science. As a step toward a coherent account of...

  • Against Individualistic Justifications of Property Rights. Cruft, Rowan // Utilitas;Jun2006, Vol. 18 Issue 2, p154 

    In this article I argue that, despite the views of such theorists as Locke, Hart and Raz, most of a person's property rights cannot be individualistically justified. Instead most property rights, if justified at all, must be justified on non-individualistic (e.g. consequentialist) grounds. This,...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics