Moral Failure — Response to Critics

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
I briefly introduce Moral Failure as a book that brings together philosophical and empirical work in moral psychology to examine moral requirements that are non-negotiable and that contravene the principle that “ought implies can.” I respond to Rivera by arguing that the process of construction that imbues normative requirements with authority need not systematize or eliminate conflicts between normative requirements. My response to Schwartzman clarifies what is problematic about nonideal theorizing that limits itself to offering action-guidance. In response to Kittay, I defend my rejection of “ought implies can,” and consider the implications of the concept of unfair moral requirements.
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2017-09-16
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
170 ( #30,645 of 2,426,378 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
22 ( #33,217 of 2,426,378 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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