Moral Blindness and Moral Responsibility: What can we learn from Rhoda Penmark?

Journal of Applied Philosophy 13 (1):41-50 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

ABSTRACT The cases devised by moral philosophers are often abstract and sterile to the point of precluding the most important function of emotion in our dealings with real people in real situations. Far from thinking that morality is exclusively a matter of rational assessment of the morally relevant features of a situation, I believe that rationality has little if anything to do with moral conduct, and I hope to illustrate this through a consideration of what precisely is amiss with Miss Penmark of The Bad Seed. [1]

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,809

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Moral Desert: A Critique.Howard Simmons - 2010 - Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
A Puzzle About Morality and Rationality.Zhen Chen - 1999 - Dissertation, Wayne State University
A Moral Argument Against Moral Realism.Melis Erdur - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (3):591-602.
Conditions of Moral Responsibility.Gordon Pettit - 2000 - Dissertation, University of Notre Dame
What’s Wrong with Morality?C. Daniel Batson - 2011 - Emotion Review 3 (3):230-236.
Acting According to Conscience.Desmond M. Clarke - 1987 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Lecture Series 22:135-149.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-10

Downloads
54 (#399,298)

6 months
2 (#1,686,184)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references