Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Out from the ShadowsAnalytical Feminist Contributions to Traditional Philosophy$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Sharon L. Crasnow and Anita M. Superson

Print publication date: 2012

Print ISBN-13: 9780199855469

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2012

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199855469.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 18 October 2019

Standards of Rationality and the Challenge of the Moral Skeptic

Standards of Rationality and the Challenge of the Moral Skeptic

Chapter:
(p.139) 6 Standards of Rationality and the Challenge of the Moral Skeptic
Source:
Out from the Shadows
Author(s):

Anita M. Superson

University of Kentucky

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199855469.003.0007

The traditional model of the skeptic about morally required action takes rational action to be action that best promotes the agent's self‐interest. Hobbesian contractarians expand this position by assuming that persons have only instrumental value, and that hypothetical persons may be embedded in a social context that accords them power over their fellows. Such assumptions introduce a sense of privilege that is problematic from a feminist perspective, allowing the privileged to ask, “Why should I participate in a system that requires self‐sacrifice?” A Kantian model, because it accords persons intrinsic value, shifts the perspective to allow the nonprivileged to ask, “Why should I participate in a system that harms me?” The best model will reflect the fullest sense of ideal rational agency. The Hobbesian model favors a maximizer about his interests; the Kantian model favors a protector of her interests. Crucial for ideal rational agency is that the agent be self‐determining; we need the best of both models, tempered with insights about the significance of having and caring appropriately about one's interests. On this model, anyone can ask, “Given that I have intrinsic value, and that I am able to protect and assert my interests because I care appropriately about them, what kind of action is morally required?” This model allows us to ask whether agents who determine themselves at least partially through their interests act rationally when they act in morally required ways.

Keywords:   moral skeptic, Hobbes, Kant, rationality, rational agency, self-interest, consistency, privilege, interest-bearer, interests

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .