Philosophical Methodology and Conceptions of Evil Action

Metaphilosophy 50 (3):296-315 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
There is considerable philosophical dispute about what it takes for an action to be evil. The methodological assumption underlying this dispute is that there is a single, shared folk conception of evil action deployed amongst culturally similar people. Empirical research we undertook suggests that this assumption is false. There exist, amongst the folk, numerous conceptions of evil action. Hence, we argue, philosophical research is most profitably spent in two endeavours. First, in determining which (if any) conception of evil action we have prudential or moral (or both) reason to deploy, and second, in determining whether we could feasibly come to adopt that conception as the single shared conception given our psychological make-up and the content of the conceptions currently deployed.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LATPMA
Revision history
Archival date: 2019-01-30
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Conceptual Ethics I.Burgess, Alexis & Plunkett, David
Conceptual Ethics II: Conceptual Ethics II.Burgess, Alexis & Plunkett, David

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2019-01-30

Total views
49 ( #32,320 of 40,618 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
49 ( #11,676 of 40,618 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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