How should we as a society value changes in population size? The question may be crucial when evaluating global warming scenarios. I defend the intuition of neutrality, which answers a part of the question. It states that – other things being equal – it is ethically irrelevant whether or not additional people are added to a population. The argument against neutrality criticizes the intuition of neutrality as inconsistent. The contribution of this thesis is twofold: First, the framework of welfare economics, (...) the intuition of neutrality, and the argument against neutrality will be presented with formal rigour. Second, the formalizations will be used for a critical analysis of the argument against neutrality. Three ethical frameworks will be assumed – the difference principle, average utilitarianism, and contractarianism –, and their relation to the explicit and hidden premises of the argument against neutrality will be investigated. The result will be that all three frameworks are compatible with the intuition of neutrality (or slightly modified versions); so the argument against neutrality does not hold within them. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie Jahrgang: 65 Heft: 4 Seiten: 621-656.

Discuto aqui duas diferentes interpretações acerca do que seria uma teoria do direito natural (ou jusnaturalismo). A primeira interpretação se caracteriza pela tese da “inseparabilidade” do direito e da moral, ao passo que a segunda se caracteriza pela tese segundo a qual existiriam “leis naturais”, i.e. leis cuja existência independeria da existência de instituições humanas. Tento mostrar que as duas teses são falsas. Procuro mostrar inicialmente que a confusão entre as duas teses se deve a uma má compreensão da distinção (...) entre frases do tipo “estar obrigado a”, e “ter a obrigação de”. Em seguida, mostro como a teoria moral contratualista nos permite resolver de modo satisfatório algumas questões que não são resolvidas adequadamente em nenhuma das duas versões do jusnaturalismo que apresento. (shrink)

Being a formal and general as well as the most widely accepted approach to practical rationality, rational decision theory should be crucial for justifying rational morals. In particular, acting morally should also be rational in decision theoretic terms. After defending this thesis, in the critical part of the paper two strategies to develop morals following this insight are criticized: game theoretical ethics of cooperation and ethical intuitionism. The central structural objections to ethics of cooperation are that they too directly aim (...) at the rationality of moral action and that they to do not encompass moral values or a moral desirability function. The constructive half of the paper takes up these criticisms by developing a two-part strategy to bring rationality and morals in line. The first part is to define ‘moral desirability’. This is done, using multi-attribute utility theory, by equating several adequate components of an individual’s comprehensive utility function with the moral desirability function. The second part is to introduce mechanisms, institutions, in particular socially valid moral norms, that provide further motivation for acting in accordance with morals. (shrink)

In der Medizinethik haben sich moralische Gründe, die die Würde des Patienten betreffen, gerade auch in Fragen am Lebensende als wichtige Grundlage praktischen Überlegens neben solchen des Wohlergehens und der Autonomie fest etabliert. Dabei hat es sich eingebürgert, zwischen Gesichtspunkten zu unterscheiden, die die kontingente Würde einer Person in den Blick nehmen, und solchen, die sich auf eine nicht-kontingente Würde ihrer Träger beziehen. In diesem Aufsatz möchte ich auf eine weitere Grundlage aufmerksam machen, die von Überlegungen, die von der Menschenwürde (...) der Betroffenen in beiderlei Art ihren Ausgangspunkt nehmen, verdeckt zu werden drohen: Moralische Gründe, die sich der Bewahrung oder Vermehrung des Sinns verschrieben haben, den Menschen in ihrem Leben sehen oder vermissen. Diese Sinn-Gründe, so mein Argument, weisen einige strukturelle Gemeinsamkeiten zu Würde-Überlegungen auf, die auf eine gemeinsame ontologische Grundlage und überlappende Gehalte beider zurückzuführen sind. Dessen unbeschadet haben beide Arten von Gründen eigenständige Funktionen beim Nachdenken über medizinethische Probleme; tatsächlich haben Gründe des Sinns im Falle moralischer Herausforderungen am Lebensende oftmals sogar den Primat in dem Sinne, dass sie konstitutiv in Würde-Gründe eingehen können und auch unabhängig davon auf moralisch relevante Gesichtspunkte verweisen. (shrink)

Peter Stemmer provides a moral theory that construes moral normativity and correlated phenomenona as essentially constituted by sanctions. Neither Stemmer nor his critics reflect sufficiently on the metaethical status of these claims, even though it is important to be clear about this status to evaluate the approach. I argue that there are two different readings of the theory: Either the “Sanktionstheorie” is a kind ofdescriptivemetaethical theory or it is what I call aconstructive(orrevisionary) theory. Stemmer’s approach is better understood as a (...) constructive metaethical theory, whereas critics mainly focus on a descriptive reading. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungDie gegenwärtige Debatte um die normativen Grundlagen kritischer Gesellschaftstheorie weist eine große Bandbreite ethischer Positionen auf: vom ethischen Negativismus, der gänzlich auf einen positiven Kritik-Maßstab verzichtet, über Entfremdungs- und Resonanztheorien, die zumindest eine grobe Vorstellung des guten Lebens vermitteln wollen, bis hin zu deontologischen Ansätzen, die Gesellschaftskritik in intelligibler Freiheit begründet sehen. Der folgende Beitrag zeigt, dass diese drei Grundpositionen sich mit Problemen konfrontiert sehen, die der hegelsche Freiheitsbegriff zu lösen vermag.

Peter Stemmer has developed an elegant and impressive theory of normativity and morality. In this article, I try to show that he does not achieve two goals he set for himself. First, his theory does not capture the categorical bindingness of moral demands, even in Stemmer’s own interpretation of categorical bindingness: it does not show that wemustfollow moral demands no matter what our personal goals and desires are. Second, just because it would be rational to establish positive moralities in a (...) hypothetical pre-moral scenario, it does not follow – and Stemmer does not establish – that only positive moralities that are in the interest of all members (and contain a prohibition on oppression) arelegitimate. For that reason, his contractarian theory collapses into relativism. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie Jahrgang: 65 Heft: 3 Seiten: 436-455.

Over the past fifty years numerous ethical and political traditions, and positions and sub-positions, have emerged in the fields of animal and environmental ethics. In combination with inconsistent terminology and axiological variation, this has made it difficult for both novices and professional scholars to maintain an overview of these fields. Referring to the preliminary work of Kenneth Goodpaster, William Frankena and Kirsten Schmidt, this paper describes and explains a workable 3D method in which advantageous use is made of three dimensions (...) in ethical argumentation: “moral considerability”, “moral significance” and “moral practice”. The method is a useful research tool for at least three reasons: it allows us to systematically analyze, reconstruct, compare and criticize different normative positions in animal and environmental ethics; it helps ethical theorists to reflect on, and define, their distinctive positions; and it leads to the construction and development of a moral position with the desirable qualities of clarity, transparency, comprehensibility and completeness. First, the 3D method is introduced, and its historical context and origins outlined. Then the three dimensions of the method (moral considerability, moral significance, and moral practice) and their interrelations are considered. The paper concludes with some critical remarks and discusses the limits of the method. (shrink)