Premium
Why the Debate on Proportionalism is Misconceived
Author(s) -
Quirk Michael J.
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
modern theology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.144
H-Index - 19
eISSN - 1468-0025
pISSN - 0266-7177
DOI - 10.1111/1468-0025.00050
Subject(s) - aside , philosophy , neglect , epistemology , moral psychology , moral reasoning , law and economics , law , sociology , psychology , political science , linguistics , psychiatry
Proportionalists and anti‐proportionalists assume that, insofar as moral description is a problem, the solution is a theory of moral description. McCormick and Finnis (as well as John Paul II) are test‐cases for showing this. However, both sides neglect the primacy of moral practice . Disputes about moral description can be recast as disputes about practices and virtues, leaving aside the whole conceptual apparatus of the proportionalism debate.