ASEBL Journal – Volume 13 Issue 1, January 2018
This possibility suggests that the occasion on which a sentence is uttered may define the non-morally relevant factors from which we make moral judgments. Perceiving moral properties might then be indistinguishable from perceiving the particulars of an occasion on which a moral judgment is made: if the property is not fixed, and“ flows” with the changing context, then to perceive a moral property may be to perceive the relevant factors from which a moral judgment is drawn.
If, furthermore, becoming a sensitive moral agent is part of acculturation, can we rightly judge the informer raised under Stalin’ s reign who denounces those he believes are threats to his way of life? If these totalitarian beliefs were sufficiently instilled in members of the Soviet State, it seems just as plausible for an informer to rely on the“ infallibility of his soul” when denouncing others as it does for Tolstoy’ s Levin when he acts generously towards his serfs.
If everything flows, can a moral property be more than the union of the relevant factors at whatever time a moral judgment is made?
This argument is of course valid only if we accept the possibility that moral properties are not fixed, and that statements with moral content do not have fixed truth-values. It may nonetheless be a helpful line of thinking for Sparks to consider.
References
1. Travis, C. 1997.“ Pragmatics.” In B. Hale and C. Wright eds. A Companion to the Philosophy of Language. Oxford: Blackwell. 2. Grossman, V. 2011. Everything Flows. Translated by R. Chandler. London: Vintage Classic.
▬
Teleological Concepts in Evolutionary Theory Applied to Human-Directed Evolution
James S. Freeman
How will moral sense, as a combination of genetically evolved and conditioned traits and behaviors and culturally evolved and conditioned beliefs, values and practices, respond to the emerging possibilities of advanced technology? What role can philosophy play in shaping the current debate, and are our present philosophical tools and discourses adequate to the task? Perhaps it is time to borrow from the recent debates over evolution within the history of science, and re-examine some philosophical views on nature and teleology to see what application they might have to a rapidly changing world. This paper looks specifically to Kant’ s Critique of Pure Judgment, with its curious pairing of aesthetics and teleology, and the work of William James, primarily Pragmatism and A Pluralistic Universe, to provide non-theistic forms of teleology, fully supportive of evolutionary theory, that can be employed as a framework to discuss and critique current technological projects, which present existential challenges
30