The Resolution of Moral Conflixts in Mandelbaum’s Phenomenological Experience

Document Type : The Quarterly Jornal

Authors

1 Associate professor of Zanjan University

2 MA student of philosophy

Abstract

The resolution of moral conflicts is the goal of any moral theory that puts an emphasis on the existence of absolute elements in moral judgments. Since deontological theories in ethics insist on the existence of absolute judgments and agent-independent obligations, they are concerned with the resolution of such conflicts more than any other theory. Various philosophical traditions, both continental and analytical, seek to solve the problem with their own methods. Maurice Mandelbaum, an American analytic philosopher, has devised and elaborated an independent ethical system from the viewpoint of moral phenomenological experience, taking the practical aim of his philosophy to be the resolution of moral conflicts. He takes the origins of such conflicts to be cognitive factors affecting the way a moral judgment is formed. Although such factors cannot always be overcome, we can consider certain principles that are phenomenologically helpful in many cases, although they are not absolute. In this point of view, principles that are helpful for the resolution of moral conflicts and disputes consist in the “principle of the priority of facts,” the “principle of universality,” and the “principle of teleology.” Given these principles, we seek to provide a criterion for the resolution for moral disagreements beyond any specific normative theory, justifying these principles given the beliefs and facts from which moral judgments inevitably arise. In this paper, we will briefly explain common solutions, especially in the deontological tradition, and then evaluate Mandelbaum’s solutions.

Keywords

References

1. اتکینسون، آر. اف. (1379)، فلسفه اخلاق، ترجمه سهراب علوی‌تبار، تهران: مرکز ترجمه و نشر کتاب.
2. اسپیلبرگ، هربرت (1392)، جنبش پدیدارشناسی، ترجمه مسعود علیا، تهران: مینوی خرد.
3. صانعی دره‌بیدی، منوچهر (1388)، درس‌های فلسفه اخلاق کانت، تهران: نقش‌ونگار.
4. کانت، ایمانوئل (1383)، مابعدالطبیعه اخلاق، ترجمه منوچهر صانعی دره‌بیدی، تهران: نقش‌و‌نگار.
5. ماندلباوم، موریس (1392)، پدیدارشناسی تجربه اخلاقی، ترجمه مریم خدادادی، تهران: نشر ققنوس.
6. هرگن، تری و مارک تیمنس (1392a)، «پدیدارشناسی اخلاق و نظریه اخلاقی»، در: تمهیدی بر پدیدارشناسی اخلاق، ترجمه مریم خدادادی، تهران: نشر ققنوس.
7. ـــــــــــــــ (1392b)، «تمهیدی بر پدیدارشناسی اخلاق آینده»، در: تمهیدی بر پدیدارشناسی اخلاق، ترجمه مریم خدادادی، تهران: نشر ققنوس.
8. Arrington, Robert L. (1997), Ethics (1945 to the present), in: Routledge History of Philosophy, Vo. 10, John V, Canfield, London: Routledge press.
9. Drummond, John (2002), “The phenomenological Tradition and Moral Philosophy,” in: Phenomenological Approaches to Moral Philosophy, John Drummond, New York: Fordham University.
10. Haidt, Jonathan (2003), The Moral Emotions, Oxford: University Oxford Press.
11. Hutcheson, F. (1755), System of Morl Philosophy, New York: Indiana University, Foulis.
12. Husserl, Edmund (1970), Phenomenological Psychology, Trans: J. M. Findlay, 2Vols, NY.
13. ____________ (1983), Idea Pertaning to a Pure Phenomenology and to Phenomenological Philosophy, Trans: W. B. Gibson, Boston.
14. Ross, W. D. (2000), Foundations of Ethics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. ____________ (2002), The Right and The Good, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Sidgwick, H. (1907), Methods of Ethics, Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
17. Stevenson, Charles L, (1944), Ethical and Language, New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press
18. McConnell, Trance (2002), “Moral Dilemmas,” in: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ moral-dilemmas.
19. Woodruff, Davis (2003), “Phenomenology,” in: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries /phenomenology.
20. Westermark, Edward (1932), ethical relativity, London: Routledge.
Naqd Va Nazar
Volume 23, Issue 89
May 2018
Pages 29-56

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics