‘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...

ver descrição completa

Na minha lista:  
Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor principal: Gingles, Dallas J. (Author)
Tipo de documento: Recurso Electrónico Artigo
Idioma:Inglês
Verificar disponibilidade: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Carregar...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publicado em: Sage 2023
Em: Studies in Christian ethics
Ano: 2023, Volume: 36, Número: 1, Páginas: 107-122
Classificações IxTheo:NCB Ética individual
ZD Psicologia
Outras palavras-chave:B Regret
B Moral emotions
B Dirty Hands
B Guilt
B Nigel Biggar
B Moral Reasoning
Acesso em linha: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Descrição
Resumo: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
Obras secundárias:Enthalten in: Studies in Christian ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1177/09539468221116300