Recklessness and Uncertainty: Jackson Cases and Merely Apparent Asymmetry

Journal of Moral Philosophy 16 (4):391-413 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Is normative uncertainty like factual uncertainty? Should it have the same effects on our actions? Some have thought not. Those who defend an asymmetry between normative and factual uncertainty typically do so as part of the claim that our moral beliefs in general are irrelevant to both the moral value and the moral worth of our actions. Here I use the consideration of Jackson cases to challenge this view, arguing that we can explain away the apparent asymmetries between normative and factual uncertainty by considering the particular features of the cases in greater detail. Such consideration shows that, in fact, normative and factual uncertainty are equally relevant to moral assessment.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
FIERAU
Upload history
Archival date: 2018-10-23
View other versions
Added to PP index
2018-10-23

Total views
340 ( #17,005 of 58,741 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
45 ( #17,547 of 58,741 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.