Amorality
Actions are usually grouped into one of several moral categories. Familiar ones include the morally required, the morally permitted, and the morally prohibited. These categories have been expanded and/or refined to include the supererogatory and the suberogatory. Some eschew deontic categories suc...
| Veröffentlicht in: | Ethical theory and moral practice |
|---|---|
| 1. VerfasserIn: | |
| Medienart: | Elektronisch Aufsatz |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Verfügbarkeit prüfen: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Lade...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Springer Science + Business Media B. V
[2016]
|
| In: |
Ethical theory and moral practice
|
| RelBib Classification: | NCA Ethik VA Philosophie |
| weitere Schlagwörter: | B
Requirability
B Amorality B Contrastivism |
| Online Zugang: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Zusammenfassung: | Actions are usually grouped into one of several moral categories. Familiar ones include the morally required, the morally permitted, and the morally prohibited. These categories have been expanded and/or refined to include the supererogatory and the suberogatory. Some eschew deontic categories such as the above, but nevertheless allow the existence of two comparative moral categories, i.e., the morally better or morally worse. At the risk of adding to the clutter, I want to explore the possibility of yet a further category, viz., amoral action, or actions that, strictly speaking, lack any moral status whatsoever. I think admitting the existence of amoral actions is not only plausible in its own right, but has consequences for our understanding the nature of moral obligation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1572-8447 |
| Enthält: | Enthalten in: Ethical theory and moral practice
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s10677-015-9622-4 |