《道德不确定性》,William MacAskill、Krister Bykvist和Toby Ord著。牛津大学出版社,2020,viii+226页

IF 1.2 2区 哲学 Q3 ECONOMICS
M. Pivato
{"title":"《道德不确定性》,William MacAskill、Krister Bykvist和Toby Ord著。牛津大学出版社,2020,viii+226页","authors":"M. Pivato","doi":"10.1017/S0266267121000122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We have all experienced ‘moral uncertainty’, in the sense of being unsure of the correct morality. Despite such uncertainty, we must make morally loaded decisions. Here is one obvious response: first, identify the moral theory you find the most plausible; then, make decisions as prescribed by this theory. But the monograph under review represents a recent literature that explores a different approach, based on maximizing expected choiceworthiness. For example, suppose I am invited to dinner, and I can order Meat or Tofu. If I order Tofu, it will hurt my host’s feelings. However, I am torn between two moral theories. I assign 95% credence to Theory X, which says it is okay to eat meat. But I assign 5% credence to Theory Y, which says meat is an atrocity. My moral decision problem can be described by the following table.","PeriodicalId":51643,"journal":{"name":"Economics and Philosophy","volume":"38 1","pages":"152 - 158"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0266267121000122","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Moral Uncertainty, by William MacAskill, Krister Bykvist and Toby Ord. Oxford University Press, 2020, viii + 226 pages\",\"authors\":\"M. Pivato\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0266267121000122\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We have all experienced ‘moral uncertainty’, in the sense of being unsure of the correct morality. Despite such uncertainty, we must make morally loaded decisions. Here is one obvious response: first, identify the moral theory you find the most plausible; then, make decisions as prescribed by this theory. But the monograph under review represents a recent literature that explores a different approach, based on maximizing expected choiceworthiness. For example, suppose I am invited to dinner, and I can order Meat or Tofu. If I order Tofu, it will hurt my host’s feelings. However, I am torn between two moral theories. I assign 95% credence to Theory X, which says it is okay to eat meat. But I assign 5% credence to Theory Y, which says meat is an atrocity. My moral decision problem can be described by the following table.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51643,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economics and Philosophy\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"152 - 158\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0266267121000122\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economics and Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267121000122\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economics and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267121000122","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们都经历过“道德不确定性”,即不确定正确的道德。尽管存在这样的不确定性,我们必须做出道德上的决定。这里有一个明显的回应:首先,找出你认为最合理的道德理论;然后,按照这个理论来做决定。但正在审查的专著代表了最近的文献,探索了一种不同的方法,基于最大化预期选择价值。例如,假设我被邀请去吃饭,我可以点肉或豆腐。如果我点豆腐,会伤害主人的感情。然而,我在两种道德理论之间摇摆不定。我认为95%的人相信X理论,它说吃肉是可以的。但我认为5%的人相信Y理论,认为吃肉是一种暴行。我的道德决策问题可以用下表来描述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Moral Uncertainty, by William MacAskill, Krister Bykvist and Toby Ord. Oxford University Press, 2020, viii + 226 pages
We have all experienced ‘moral uncertainty’, in the sense of being unsure of the correct morality. Despite such uncertainty, we must make morally loaded decisions. Here is one obvious response: first, identify the moral theory you find the most plausible; then, make decisions as prescribed by this theory. But the monograph under review represents a recent literature that explores a different approach, based on maximizing expected choiceworthiness. For example, suppose I am invited to dinner, and I can order Meat or Tofu. If I order Tofu, it will hurt my host’s feelings. However, I am torn between two moral theories. I assign 95% credence to Theory X, which says it is okay to eat meat. But I assign 5% credence to Theory Y, which says meat is an atrocity. My moral decision problem can be described by the following table.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The disciplines of economics and philosophy each possess their own special analytical methods, whose combination is powerful and fruitful. Each discipline can be enriched by the other. Economics and Philosophy aims to promote their mutual enrichment by publishing articles and book reviews in all areas linking these subjects. Topics include the methodology and epistemology of economics, the foundations of decision theory and game theory, the nature of rational choice in general, historical work on economics with a philosophical purpose, ethical issues in economics, the use of economic techniques in ethical theory, and many other subjects.
×
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