HarmanIs There a Single True Morality1984.docx
- 文档编号:23398841
- 上传时间:2023-05-16
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:27
- 大小:35.71KB
HarmanIs There a Single True Morality1984.docx
《HarmanIs There a Single True Morality1984.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《HarmanIs There a Single True Morality1984.docx(27页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
HarmanIsThereaSingleTrueMorality1984
[DavidCoppandDavidZimmerman.eds.,Morality,ReasonandTruth:
NewEssaysontheFoundationsofEthics,RowmanandAllanheld,1984,pp.27—48.]
[027]
ChapterOne
IsThereASingleTrueMorality?
GILBERTHARMAN
Confession
Ihavealwaysbeenamoralrelativist.AsfarbackasIcanrememberthinkingaboutit,ithasseemedtomeobviousthatthedictatesofmoralityarisefromsomesortofconventionorunderstandingamongpeople,thatdifferentpeoplearriveatdifferentunderstandings,andthattherearenobasicmoraldemandsthatapplytoeveryone.Formanyyears,thisseemedsoobvioustomethatIassumeditwaseveryone’sinstinctiveviewatleasteveryonewhogavethematteranythought“inthisdayandage.”[哈曼一直将如下要求看成是理所当然:
道德要求来自人们之间的约定俗成;不同的人达成不同的道德要求;没有适合于所有人的基本道德要求]
WhenIfirststudiedphilosophicalethics(inthe1950s),Iwasnotdisabusedofthisopinion.Themainissueatthetimeseemedtobetodetermineexactlywhatformof“noncognitivism”wascorrect.(Accordingtononcognitivism,moraljudgmentsdonotfunctiontodescribeamoralrealitybutdosomethingelse—expressfeelings,prescribeacourseofaction,andsoforth.)
ItistruethatmanyofthephilosophersIstudiedseemedforsomereasontowanttoavoidcallingthemselves“relativists.”Thiswasusuallyaccomplishedbydefiningmoralrelativismtobeanobviouslyinconsistentposition;forexample,theviewboththattherearenouniversalmoraltruthsandalsothateveryoneoughttofollowthedictatesofhisorhergroup,wherethislastclaimistakentobeauniversalmoraltruth.Iwasn’tsurewhatthisverbalmaneuverwassupposedtoaccomplish.Whywouldanyonewanttogivesuchadefinitionofmoralrelativism?
Moralrelativismwasobviouslycorrect,andthephilosophersIwasstudyingseemedalltobemoralrelativistseveniftheydidnotwanttodescribethemselvesinthatway.[按照哈曼的看法,他不知道为何人们将道德相对主义描述为一种不合理的不连贯的立场。
在他看来,他所研究的所有的哲学家(50年代?
)都是相对主义者,但不知为何他们不愿意自称是相对主义者。
]
[028]
Inthe1960sIwasdistressedtohearfromvariouspeopleteachingethicsthatstudentsintheirclassestendedtoproclaimthemselvesmoralrelativistsuntiltheyhadbeenshownhowconfusedtheywereaboutethics.Isuspectedthatwhatconfusionstherewerewerenotconfusionsofthestudents,butwereconfusionsoftheirteachers,dueperhapstoafaultydefinitionofmoralrelativism.Itseemedtomethattheobvioussolutionwastoshowthatmoralrelativismcanheconsistentlydefinedasaplausibleviewandthatstandardobjectionstomoralrelativismaremistaken.[哈曼怀疑造成混乱的不是学生,而是他们的老师。
]
So,Ieventuallywroteandpublishedanessayaboutthis(Harman,1975),naivelythinkingitwouldclearthingsupandendworriesaboutmoralrelativism.Iwassurprisedtodiscoverthatthisdidnothappen.[于是他写了道德相对主义一文,以为从此可以澄清相对主义的问题,结束关于道德相对主义的担心,但结果他吃惊地发现这种情况并没有出现。
甚至他自己的学生也不赞成他的观点。
]IwasalsostartledtofindthatmanystudentsinmyownethicscoursesresistedmyattempttomakeclearwhatIthoughttheyinstinctivelybelieved.AftersomestudyIconcludedthatinfactonlysomeofthestudentsinmycourseswereinstinctivemoralrelativists;asignificantnumberofthemwereinstinctiveabsolutists.[哈曼最后结论是:
只有一部分学生是本能的道德相对主义者,而相当多的则是本能的绝对主义者。
]
Ihadknownofcoursethattherewerephilosophersandfriendsofminewhowerenotmoralrelativists.ForalongtimeIattributedthistotheirperversityandloveofthebizarreandattachednosignificancetoit.ButthenIdiscoveredthatsomeofthemthoughtmoralrelativismwastheperverseview,akindofphilosophicalfollylikeskepticismaboutothermindsortheexternalworld(forexample,Nagel,1980).Iwasstunned!
[我简直都晕了!
]Howcouldtheythinkthatwhentheyknewsomanymoralrelativists(likeme)andnoepistemologicalskeptics(atleastnonewhotooksuchskepticismseriouslyinordinarylife)?
ItthenoccurredtometowonderhowIcouldthinkofmoralabsolutismassuchaperverseviewwhenIknewsomanymoralabsolutists.
TheIssue
Itturnsouttomysurprisethatthequestionwhetherthereisasingletruemoralityisanunresolvedissueinmoralphilosophy.Ononesidearerelativists,skeptics,nihilists,andnoncognitivists.Ontheothersidearethosewhobelieveinabsolutevaluesandamorallawthatappliestoeveryone.Strangelyonlyafewpeopleseemtobeundecided.Almosteveryoneseemstobefirmlyononesideortheother,andalmosteveryoneseemstothinkhisorhersideisobviouslyright,theothersiderepresentingakindofridiculousfolly.Thisisstrangesinceeveryoneknows,oroughttoknow,thatmanyintelligentpeopleareoneachsideofthisissue.
[029]
TwoApproaches
InthisessayIwanttosuggestthatpartoftheexplanationforthismutualincomprehensionisthattherearetwodifferentwaystodomoralphilosophy.Ifoneapproachistaken,moralrelativism,noncognitivism,orskepticismmayseemobviouslycorrectandmoralabsolutismmayseemfoolish.Iftheotherapproachistaken,absolutismmayseemclearlyrightandskepticism,relativism,andnoncognitivismmayseemfoolish.[哈曼认为这种互相的区别与互相的不理解是由于两种研究道德哲学的方法。
一个主张用“科学”的方法,寻找自然科学世界中的客观事实,另一个主张伦理学的特殊性。
(我认为这是由于道德判断的两个特征所决定的:
规范性与适真性。
)]
Thedifferenceinapproachesis,toputitcrudelyadifferenceinattitudetowardscience.Onesidesayswemustconcentrateonfindingtheplaceofvalueandobligationintheworldoffactsasrevealedbyscience.Theothersidesayswemustignorethatproblemandconcentrateonethicsproper.
Ofcourse,bothsidesagreethatwemustbeginatthebeginningwithourinitialbeliefs,bothmoralandnonmoral,andconsiderpossiblemodificationsthatwillmakethesebeliefsmorecoherentwitheachotherandwithplausiblegeneralizationsandotherexplanatoryprinciples.Eventually,wehopetoarriveata“reflectiveequilibrium”(Rawls,1971)whennofurthermodificationsseemcalledfor,atleastforthetimebeing.Thisprocesswillinevitablyleavemanyissuesunresolved;inparticular,wemayfindourselveswithnoaccountoftheplacethatvalueandobligationhaveintheworldoffacts.[罗尔斯的反思平衡法将形而上学的问题放在一边,只考虑判断之间的逻辑关系。
]Thiswillnotdismaysomeonewhoiswillingtoleavethatquestionunanswered,butitwillbedisturbingtosomeonewho,onthewayto“reflectiveequilibrium,”hascometothinkthatthebasicissueinmoralphilosophyispreciselyhowvalueandobligationfitintothescientificconceptionoftheworld.
Iwillusetheterm“naturalism”foranapproachtoethicsthatisinthiswaydominatedbyaconcernwiththeplaceofvaluesinthenaturalworld.Iwillcallanyapproachthatisnotsodominatedaninstanceof“autonomousethics,”[任何非自然主义的方法都被称为自立或自主的伦理学。
]sincesuchanapproachallowsustopursueethicsinternallyOfcourse,autonomousethicsallowsthatscienceisrelevanttoethicsinasmuchasethicalassessmentdependsonthefactsofthecase.Butunlikenaturalism,autonomousethicsdoesnottakethemainquestionofethicstobethenaturalisticstatusofvaluesandobligations.
Naturalism
Ihopetheterms“naturalism”and“autonomousethics”willnotbetoomisleading.Theterm“naturalism”issometimesreservedforthethesisthatmoraljudgmentscanbeanalyzedintoorreducedtofactualstatementsofasortclearlycompatiblewiththescientificworldview.I[030]amusingtheterm“naturalism”morebroadlyinamoretraditionalandaccuratesense.Naturalisminthissensedoesnothavetoleadtonaturalisticreduction,althoughthatisonepossibility.Anotherpossibilityisthatthereisnowayinwhichethicscouldfitintothescientificconceptionoftheworld.Inthatcasenaturalismleadstomoralnihilism,asinMackie(1977).Mackiesupposesthatethicsrequiresabsolutevalueswhichhavethepropertythatanyoneawareoftheirexistencemustnecessarilybemotivatedtoactmorally.Sinceourscientificconceptionoftheworldhasnoplaceforentitiesofthissort,andsincethereisnowayinwhichwecouldbecomeawareofsuchentities,Mackieconcludesthatethicsmustberejectedasrestingonafalsepresupposition.ThatisaversionofnaturalismasIamusingtheterm.[哈曼的自然主义不是指道德判断可以还原为事实判断的还原主义,而是指的意义更广的,可以导致道德虚无主义的自然主义。
]
Naturalismcanalsoleadonetoanoncognitiveanalysisofmoraljudgments.Inthisview,moraljudgmentsdonotfunctiontodescribetheworld,buttodosomethingelse—toexpressone’sattitudesforandagainstthings,[这种自然主义还会导致对道德判断的非认知主义的分析。
典型的例子是Stevenson和Hare。
]asStevenson(1963)argues—ortorecommendoneoranothercourseofactionorgeneralpolicy,asHare(1952,1981)proposes.Oranaturalistmaydecidethatmoraljudgmentsdomakefactualclaimsthatfitinwiththeclaimsofscience.Thiscanbeillustratedbysomesortofnaturalisticreduction.OneexamplewouldbeananalysisthattakesmoralclaimstobeclaimsaboutthereactionsofahypotheticalimpartialobserverasinHume(1739)orFirth(1952).[自然主义者还可以认为道德判断确实是事实判断。
比如,将道德主张看成是理想观察者的反应的主张,如休谟等。
]
Morecomplexpositionsarepossible.Mackie(1977)arguesinChapter1thatethicsrestsonafalsepresupposition,butthenhegoesoninlaterchapterstodiscussparticularmoralissues.ItisalmostasifhehadfirstdemonstratedthatGoddoesnotexistandhadthengoneontoconsiderwhetherHeiswiseandloving.Presumably,Mackiebelievesthatethicsasnormallyconceivedmustbeorcanbereplacedwithsomethingelse.Buthedoesnotindicateexactlywhatsortofreplacementhehasinmind—whetheritisaninstitutionofsomesort,forexample.Nordoeshesayhowmoralclaimsmadewithinthisreplacementfitinwiththeclaimsofscience.Isuspecthewouldacceptsomesortofnoncognitivistaccountofthejudgmentsthataretoreplacetheoldmoraljudgments.
Itispossibletobebothanaturalistandanabsolutist,alt
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- HarmanIs There Single True Morality1984
![提示](https://static.bdocx.com/images/bang_tan.gif)