|
Title
|
|
|
|
Reid's non-Humean theory of moral motives
|
|
|
Author
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
| Contrary to the widespread view that Reid and Hume agree that reason, alone, is inert, I argue that they disagree on this point. Both accept that reason plays a role in forming moral sentiments, and that affections are components of moral evaluations. However, I show that for Reid moral evaluations (comprised of moral judgments and moral affections) are different from moral motives (which are not comprised of affections). Moral motives for Reid are mind-independent states of affairs that are grasped by reason and do not require affections to influence human beings. Reid hence holds a non-Humean theory in which reason, alone, is not inert. |
|
|
|
Language
|
|
|
|
English
|
|
|
Source (journal)
|
|
|
|
Pacific philosophical quarterly. - Los Angeles, Calif.
|
|
|
Publication
|
|
|
|
Los Angeles, Calif.
:
2018
|
|
|
ISSN
|
|
|
|
0031-5621
0279-0750
|
|
|
DOI
|
|
|
|
10.1111/PAPQ.12222
|
|
|
Volume/pages
|
|
|
|
99
:s:[1]
(2018)
, p. 205-224
|
|
|
ISI
|
|
|
|
000430829000010
|
|
|
Full text (Publisher's DOI)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Full text (publisher's version - intranet only)
|
|
|
|
|
|