z-logo
Premium
Justifiability to Each Person
Author(s) -
Parfit Derek
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
ratio
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.475
H-Index - 29
eISSN - 1467-9329
pISSN - 0034-0006
DOI - 10.1046/j.1467-9329.2003.00229.x
Subject(s) - philosophy , citation , rationality , epistemology , sociology , law , political science
Though ‘reasonable’ usually means much the same as ‘rational’, Scanlon uses this word in a different, moral sense. We are unreasonable, in this sense, if we ignore, or give too little weight to, some other people’s well-being or moral claims. Some critics have suggested that, because Scanlon appeals to this sense of ‘reasonable’, his formula is empty. On this objection, whenever we believe that some act is wrong, we shall believe that people have moral claims not to be treated in this way. We could therefore argue that such acts are disallowed by some principle which no one could reasonably reject, since anyone who rejected this principle would be giving too little weight to people’s moral claims not to be treated in this way. Since everyone could claim that the principles which they accept could not be reasonably rejected, Scanlon’s Formula would make no difference to our moral thinking. That is not so. If we reject the principles that disallow certain acts, we are denying that such acts are wrong. This denial would be unreasonable if it would give too little weight to some other people’s moral claims. So Scanlon’s Formula implies that

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here