Modern Moral Philosophy

Bibliographic Data

ID18927598
AuthorsG E M Anscombe (Somerville Hospital, corresponding author)
Year1958
Volume33
Issue124
Pages1-19
Publication date1958-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePhilosophy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0031-8191 • E-ISSN: 1469-817X
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0031819100037943
OpenAlexW4292083047
LanguageEN
Citations received494

I will begin by stating three theses which I present in this paper. The first is that it is not profitable for us at present to do moral philosophy; that should be laid aside at any rate until we have an adequate philosophy of psychology, in which we are conspicuously lacking. The second is that the concepts of obligation, and duty— moral obligation and moral duty, that is to say—and of what is morally right and wrong, and of the moral sense of “ought,” ought to be jettisoned if this is psychologically possible; because they are survivals, or derivatives from survivals, from an earlier conception of ethics which no longer generally survives, and are only harmful without it. My third thesis is that the differences between the wellknown English writers on moral philosophy from Sidgwick to the present day are of little importance

Aside · Duty · Epistemology · Moral obligation · Moral philosophy · Moral psychology · Obligation · Political science · Theology · Ethics in medical practice · Law · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access