Scientific explanation and moral explanation

Moral philosophers are, among other things, in the business of constructing moral theories. And moral theories are, among other things, supposed to explain moral phenomena. Consequently, one’s views about the nature of moral explanation will influence the kinds of moral theories one is willing to co...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Leibowitz, Uri D.
Format: Article
Published: 2011
Online Access:https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/1542/
_version_ 1848790626769829888
author Leibowitz, Uri D.
author_facet Leibowitz, Uri D.
author_sort Leibowitz, Uri D.
building Nottingham Research Data Repository
collection Online Access
description Moral philosophers are, among other things, in the business of constructing moral theories. And moral theories are, among other things, supposed to explain moral phenomena. Consequently, one’s views about the nature of moral explanation will influence the kinds of moral theories one is willing to countenance. Many moral philosophers are (explicitly or implicitly) committed to a deductive model of explanation. As I see it, this commitment lies at the heart of the current debate between moral particularists and moral generalists. In this paper I argue that we have good reasons to give up this commitment. In fact, I show that an examination of the literature on scientific explanation reveals that we are used to, and comfortable with, non-deductive explanations in almost all areas of inquiry. As a result, I argue that we have reason to believe that moral explanations need not be grounded in exceptionless moral principles.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T18:15:37Z
format Article
id nottingham-1542
institution University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T18:15:37Z
publishDate 2011
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling nottingham-15422020-05-04T20:23:58Z https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/1542/ Scientific explanation and moral explanation Leibowitz, Uri D. Moral philosophers are, among other things, in the business of constructing moral theories. And moral theories are, among other things, supposed to explain moral phenomena. Consequently, one’s views about the nature of moral explanation will influence the kinds of moral theories one is willing to countenance. Many moral philosophers are (explicitly or implicitly) committed to a deductive model of explanation. As I see it, this commitment lies at the heart of the current debate between moral particularists and moral generalists. In this paper I argue that we have good reasons to give up this commitment. In fact, I show that an examination of the literature on scientific explanation reveals that we are used to, and comfortable with, non-deductive explanations in almost all areas of inquiry. As a result, I argue that we have reason to believe that moral explanations need not be grounded in exceptionless moral principles. 2011 Article PeerReviewed Leibowitz, Uri D. (2011) Scientific explanation and moral explanation. Noûs, 45 (3). pp. 472-503. ISSN 0029-4624 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-0068.2010.00775.x/abstract doi:10.1111/j.1468-0068.2010.00775.x doi:10.1111/j.1468-0068.2010.00775.x
spellingShingle Leibowitz, Uri D.
Scientific explanation and moral explanation
title Scientific explanation and moral explanation
title_full Scientific explanation and moral explanation
title_fullStr Scientific explanation and moral explanation
title_full_unstemmed Scientific explanation and moral explanation
title_short Scientific explanation and moral explanation
title_sort scientific explanation and moral explanation
url https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/1542/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/1542/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/1542/