Premium
On the Irreducibility of Moral Incapacity
Author(s) -
Holiday D. A.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
the southern journal of philosophy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.281
H-Index - 21
eISSN - 2041-6962
pISSN - 0038-4283
DOI - 10.1111/sjp.12382
Subject(s) - character (mathematics) , moral authority , moral disengagement , moral psychology , moral character , passions , epistemology , moral agency , social cognitive theory of morality , agency (philosophy) , psychology , moral reasoning , normative ethics , feature (linguistics) , philosophy , social psychology , sociology , mathematics , linguistics , geometry
There is a growing consensus that moral incapacities are an important feature of the moral life and moral character. Philosophers are, however, somewhat at odds over the status and explanatory role of such volitional limits in models of moral psychology. They are sometimes understood reductively, as the products or expressive manifestations of underlying, working parts of character (such as dispositions, beliefs, passions, and values). Others view moral incapacities as constitutive elements of character, that is, primitive features of moral mindedness and agency which help give a person their moral substance and shape. I defend the constitutive conception by arguing against the most promising reductive account available: Dwight Furrow’s account of the incapacity underlying Oscar Schindler’s moral heroism. This gives strong evidence that moral incapacity is a basic and constitutive feature of our conception of character.