Intuition and Kagan's Hierarchicalism
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12227643 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Xihe Ouyang (0009-0007-3181-3863, University of Calgary, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 36 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 265-279 |
| Publication date | 2024-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Utilitas (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0953-8208 • E-ISSN: 1741-6183 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0953820824000165 |
| OpenAlex | W4403515261 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 11 |
According to Shelly Kagan, the moral status of an individual is determined by the extent to which the individual has (has now, might/will have, or could have had) certain psychological capacities. Roughly speaking, the greater one's relevant psychological capacities, the higher their moral status. In this paper, I offer a twofold critique of Kagan's hierarchicalism. On the one hand, I argue against the primary argument in favor of Kagan's view (the argument from distribution) by challenging the key intuition on which the argument relies, thereby reducing the appeal of Kagan's position. On the other hand, using Kagan's general methodology, I argue that a good reason to reject Kagan's account of moral status is that he fails to explain away the counterintuitive result of his theory in the case of normal variation
Economics · Epistemology · Intuition · Positive economics · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Psychology · Theology and Philosophy of Evil
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |