当前位置: X-MOL 学术Philosophical Studies › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
What the doctor should do: perspectivist duties for objectivists about ought
Philosophical Studies Pub Date : 2021-09-02 , DOI: 10.1007/s11098-021-01717-x
Davide Fassio 1, 2
Affiliation  

Objectivism is the view that how an agent ought to act depends on all kinds of facts, regardless of the agent’s epistemic position with respect to them. One of the most important challenges to this view is constituted by certain cases involving specific conditions of uncertainty—so-called three-options cases. In these cases it seems overwhelmingly plausible that an agent ought to do what is recommendable given her limited perspective, even though the agent knows that this is not objectively the best course of action. The standard objectivist response to this challenge relies on a distinction between what one ought to do and what would be blameworthy or unreasonable to do. This response is affected by several problems. In this paper I introduce and defend an alternative objectivist response to the challenge. My proposal admits that in the relevant cases the agent ought to do what is recommendable given her perspective, but maintains that this diagnosis of the cases is fully compatible with objectivism. I argue that this proposal has several advantages over alternative accounts of the cases.



中文翻译:

医生应该做什么:客观主义者关于应该的透视主义职责

客观主义认为,代理人应该如何行动取决于各种事实,而不管代理人对它们的认知立场如何。对这种观点最重要的挑战之一是某些涉及特定不确定条件的案例——所谓的三选择案例。在这些情况下,考虑到她有限的视角,代理应该做值得推荐的事情似乎是非常合理的,即使代理知道这在客观上并不是最好的行动方案。对这一挑战的标准客观主义回应依赖于区分应该做什么和什么是应受指责或不合理的行为。这种反应受到几个问题的影响。在本文中,我介绍并捍卫了对挑战的另一种客观主义回应。我的提议承认,在相关案例中,代理人应该按照她的观点去做值得推荐的事情,但坚持认为这种对案例的诊断完全符合客观主义。我认为,与案例的替代说明相比,该建议有几个优点。

更新日期:2021-09-04
down
wechat
bug