Who Do Our Methods Serve and Protect? Pedagogical and Meta-Ethical Challenges in Teaching Breonna Taylor

Andrew Stone Porter
{"title":"Who Do Our Methods Serve and Protect? Pedagogical and Meta-Ethical Challenges in Teaching Breonna Taylor","authors":"Andrew Stone Porter","doi":"10.1353/cro.2023.a915437","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Introductory courses in Christian ethics ordinarily survey deontological, teleological, and virtue ethics, testing each against case studies. In spring 2021, this author followed the customary approach, but our case was a claim made by Sgt. John Mattingly of Louisville Metro Police Department, who was involved in the killing of Breonna Taylor. In an e-mail to over 1,000 LMPD colleagues, Mattingly claimed, \"I know we did the legal, moral and ethical thing that night.\" Mattingly's striking assertion raises epistemological and meta-ethical questions. In what sense was killing Ms. Taylor the right thing to do? Was this action virtuous? Did it proceed from a worthy intention toward a valid goal? Was it done in accordance with duty/ies? Did it produce good consequences? Was it conducive toward liberation? While the methods are necessary, none is fully adequate; the article argues that they should be supplemented by responsibilist ethical lenses adapted from Darryl Trimiew and Iris Marion Young.","PeriodicalId":109838,"journal":{"name":"CrossCurrents","volume":"40 1","pages":"304 - 327"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CrossCurrents","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/cro.2023.a915437","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:Introductory courses in Christian ethics ordinarily survey deontological, teleological, and virtue ethics, testing each against case studies. In spring 2021, this author followed the customary approach, but our case was a claim made by Sgt. John Mattingly of Louisville Metro Police Department, who was involved in the killing of Breonna Taylor. In an e-mail to over 1,000 LMPD colleagues, Mattingly claimed, "I know we did the legal, moral and ethical thing that night." Mattingly's striking assertion raises epistemological and meta-ethical questions. In what sense was killing Ms. Taylor the right thing to do? Was this action virtuous? Did it proceed from a worthy intention toward a valid goal? Was it done in accordance with duty/ies? Did it produce good consequences? Was it conducive toward liberation? While the methods are necessary, none is fully adequate; the article argues that they should be supplemented by responsibilist ethical lenses adapted from Darryl Trimiew and Iris Marion Young.
我们的方法为谁服务、保护谁?教学中的教学法和元伦理挑战 Breonna Taylor
摘要:基督教伦理学入门课程通常会对道义伦理学、目的论伦理学和美德伦理学进行调查,并通过案例研究对每种伦理学进行检验。2021 年春,笔者按照惯例进行了教学,但我们的案例是路易斯维尔市警察局约翰-马廷利军士长(Sgt. John Mattingly)的说法,他参与了杀害布罗娜-泰勒(Breonna Taylor)的事件。在发给 1000 多名路易斯维尔市警察局同事的一封电子邮件中,马廷礼声称:"我知道那天晚上我们做了合法、合乎道德和伦理的事情。马廷礼惊人的断言引发了认识论和元伦理学问题。从什么意义上说,杀害泰勒女士是正确的?这一行为是良性的吗?它的出发点是为了实现一个有效的目标吗?它的行为符合职责吗?它产生了良好的后果吗?是否有利于解脱?虽然这些方法都是必要的,但没有一种是完全足够的;文章认为,应该用责任主义伦理透视法来补充这些方法,该透视法改编自达里尔-特里米尤(Darryl Trimiew)和艾瑞斯-马里恩-扬(Iris Marion Young)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信