Jamieson Summary

Describes the work of modern ethicists and to the the ethics we can relate to in our everyday lives.

‘Moral theorising can be found on the highways and byways, practiced by everyone from bartenders to politicians’. Morality comes from our own discussion.

Modern moral philosophers respect it as legit moral practice - its relevant to most people. Traditional ethical theories (i.e. in Unit 3) are not so relevant in the moral debate. Jamieson looks to explain this change in emphasis

“In this article – I will be mainly concernedwith questions about moral theory rather than questions in moral theory”. He will test the assumptions on which theories are based and explain why this are questioned.

He identifies several philosophers:

Williams is sceptical of the traditional view of ethical theories.

Stocker identifies the ‘schizophrenic’ nature of this. - ‘Cafeteria of conflicting moralities’ (Alasdair Macintyre).

Fullinwinder - anti-theoretical position

Not looking to find solutions but will ‘gesture’ to what he believes is the truth.

J-son speaks of ‘anti-theorists’ and says the main dispute is the ‘dominant conception’ (DC) - the term used for the core ideas ethical theories are created around - such as agape in Sit. Ethics. The DC aims to establish a universally accepted theory.

Reasoning behind an ethical theory is usually legal (rule-based) or economic (amount of benefit gained). Often the DC is implicit but it has been written about by people like Sidgwick and Rawls (both mentioned in Schneewind)

Anti-theorists object to the DC because they think morality comes from the ground up not academics or God. They draw on the ethical ideas of Hume and Aristotle to support this.

Liz Anscombe in the mid 20th century pointed out there is no basis to legal morality as there is no divine lawgiver (God) - ’the law conception of morality is untenable'. The idea of a divine law giver is anachronistic - out of date. If morality is to be secular it should be like Aristotle rather than Sedgwick. Moral philosophy ‘should be laid aside... until we have an adequate philosophy of psychology'

Macintyre and Williams both agree that morality does not have authority anymoree as society is so diverse. Both agree that modern moral philosophy is a matter of intuition but this does not help us choose which is the better intuition in a dilemma. Macintyre said we need to find new pluralistic liberal way forward.

Moral philosophy is more of a ‘problem than a solution’ - Macintyre

WIlliams - Morality must overcome ‘the bondage of morality'

At the end of this section Jamieson suggests away to reconcile the traditional ‘theory’ view of ethics with the modern‘practice’ view.

He agrees, that in everyday life we hardly everuse moral theories. However we often refer to them as well as religiousbeliefs and cultural outlooks to defend our morality. He says ‘itis a way in which our ‘better self’…. Sometimes tries to carry the day’. When we reflect deeper we use theories or ‘theory fragments’.

Jamison goes on to consider the assumptions that are the basis of creating a theory. If the basis is sound then the theory can be universal. 2 main systems are foundationalism and the more popular coherentism.

FOundationalism starts with a belief which is assumed to be true - Bentham based utilitarianism on the assumption man is motivated by pleasure and pain. Jamieson uses the example of a man called John who thinks its wrong to kill his neighbour based on theself-evident principle that it is wrong to kill people.

Problem with foundationalism is how to be sure the truth is self-evident - may be proved wrong as Bentham was - man is motivated by more than just pleasure and pain (Brain study shows these are the main motivators).

Jameson says we can find self-evident truths that are logically sound - ‘all ravens are ravens’ - but these truths 'are not rich enough' to lead to a full blown universal theory.

‘Few moral theorists willing to endorse foundationalist methodology'

More popular as it is based on several connecting ideas. Kant’s categorical imperitave is based on several ideas that link together to support the theory. Jameson says a modern form of coherentism = Rawl’s method of reflective equilibrium which is a way of coming to a solution based on a series of formulation and revision.

Problem with coherentism is that beliefs can still be wrong and don’t have ‘probative force’ (cannot be proven). Hitler’s fascist philosophy is a result of ‘Mein Kampf’ - a horrific version of a reflective equilibrium.

Jamieson says these systems have similarities, such as the inability of either to guarantee change - an essential element of ethical theory.

‘common-sense morality’ is a ‘ragtag collection’ of societies beliefs, habits and prejudices

Another similarity is that they have the same goal of the ‘identification of a defensible set of moral beliefs, convictions, dispositions and purposes’ or ‘intuitions’.

Jameson calls examples ‘intuition pumps’ because they evoke intuitional responses. Use the example of JS Mill - satisfied pig/dissatisfied socrates’ or Fletcher Sit. Ethics.

Jamieson explains 4 kinds of examples used in theorising (a following - but revision - of O’Neill) - literary, ostensive, hypothetical and imaginary. Jamieson finds imaginary examples problematic as they are unrelalistic, evoking fantasy worlds.

Uses the example of Tooley’s cat where we are asked to imagine killing a kitten which has a human brain. Tooley says this is morally equivalent to killing a foetus. Jamieson says we can’t trust our intuition in imaginary situations

Brief conclusion is helpful as he lays out his own views -

‘moral theories are derivative of moral theorizing’

‘Moral theorising is part of everyday moral practice’

‘Both foundationalism and coherentism are problematical’

‘Appeals to imaginary cases are often misleading and unreliable’

Moral theories are under explored