In this article I address a number of issues raised by Colin Koopman, Alex Livingston, and Michael Slater to my reading of James’s ethics as defended in my 2015 book having to do with, in turn, the relationship between ethics and politics, ethics and psychological types, and ethics and religion. In accounting for these charges, I vindicate and further qualify my interpretation of James as a moral therapist.

中文翻译：

---

十字路口的伦理：对库普曼、利文斯顿和斯莱特的回复

在这篇文章中，我解决了科林·库普曼、亚历克斯·利文斯顿和迈克尔·斯莱特在阅读詹姆斯的道德规范时提出的一些问题，正如我在 2015 年的书中所辩护的那样，这些问题反过来又涉及道德与政治、道德与心理之间的关系类型、伦理和宗教。在解释这些指控时，我证明并进一步证明了我对詹姆斯作为道德治疗师的解释。