‘Dirty Hands’: Guilt and Regret in Moral Reasoning

Nigel Biggar argues against ‘dirty hands’ reasoning for two reasons. The first is that dirty hands reasoning is paradoxical. The second is that ‘dirt’ in dirty hands is often—and wrongly—conceived as guilt. According to Biggar, the dirt should instead be understood as regret. In this article, I defe...

Descrizione completa

Salvato in:  
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autore principale: Gingles, Dallas J. (Autore)
Tipo di documento: Elettronico Articolo
Lingua:Inglese
Verificare la disponibilità: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Caricamento...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Pubblicazione: Sage 2023
In: Studies in Christian ethics
Anno: 2023, Volume: 36, Fascicolo: 1, Pagine: 107-122
Notazioni IxTheo:NCB Etica individuale
ZD Psicologia
Altre parole chiave:B Regret
B Moral emotions
B Dirty Hands
B Guilt
B Nigel Biggar
B Moral Reasoning
Accesso online: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Descrizione
Riepilogo:Nigel Biggar argues against ‘dirty hands’ reasoning for two reasons. The first is that dirty hands reasoning is paradoxical. The second is that ‘dirt’ in dirty hands is often—and wrongly—conceived as guilt. According to Biggar, the dirt should instead be understood as regret. In this article, I defend dirty hands reasoning against both criticisms. On the one hand, I argue that dirty hands reasoning is not necessarily paradoxical. On the other, I argue that, because guilt, more than regret, is meant to motivate the agent we should prefer a prima facie interpretation of the ‘dirt’ in dirty hands as guilt instead of regret.
ISSN:0953-9468
Comprende:Enthalten in: Studies in Christian ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1177/09539468221116300