Applications of the Wide Reflective Equilibrium

IF 0.9 Q3 ETHICS Journal of Ethics Pub Date : 2023-09-22 DOI:10.1007/s10892-023-09458-1
Kevin Helms
{"title":"Applications of the Wide Reflective Equilibrium","authors":"Kevin Helms","doi":"10.1007/s10892-023-09458-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The wide reflective equilibrium (WRE) is considered the most important method of ethical justification and is intensively discussed in the scientific community. However, it is unclear to what extent it is actually applied in the ethical literature. The objective of this paper is to fill this gap by providing a critical overview of its explicit applications. Explicit application refers to studies that, following Daniels’ definition, contain three levels, name their elements, and provide a connection between the levels. Philosophers Index, ProQuest, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for studies that explicitly used the WRE method and were written in German or English. All topics, disciplines, and publication forms were considered. Nineteen studies were found in which the WRE was applied 23 times. In the 23 applications, 50 equilibria were discussed, and 19 times it was reported that an equilibrium state was reached. The authors applied the WRE in various disciplines, for different purposes, and to diverse topics. The applications themselves differed considerably regarding the application procedure and the scope. Differences can be seen in particular with regard to the presentation of the adjustment process and the WRE criteria used. The results indicate that the WRE can be successfully applied, but the number of explicit applications is still very low. Further research is needed to develop the WRE into an established method of justification. In particular, standards are needed for adjustment and for WRE criteria.","PeriodicalId":35843,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ethics","volume":"2015 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-023-09458-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The wide reflective equilibrium (WRE) is considered the most important method of ethical justification and is intensively discussed in the scientific community. However, it is unclear to what extent it is actually applied in the ethical literature. The objective of this paper is to fill this gap by providing a critical overview of its explicit applications. Explicit application refers to studies that, following Daniels’ definition, contain three levels, name their elements, and provide a connection between the levels. Philosophers Index, ProQuest, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for studies that explicitly used the WRE method and were written in German or English. All topics, disciplines, and publication forms were considered. Nineteen studies were found in which the WRE was applied 23 times. In the 23 applications, 50 equilibria were discussed, and 19 times it was reported that an equilibrium state was reached. The authors applied the WRE in various disciplines, for different purposes, and to diverse topics. The applications themselves differed considerably regarding the application procedure and the scope. Differences can be seen in particular with regard to the presentation of the adjustment process and the WRE criteria used. The results indicate that the WRE can be successfully applied, but the number of explicit applications is still very low. Further research is needed to develop the WRE into an established method of justification. In particular, standards are needed for adjustment and for WRE criteria.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宽反射平衡的应用
广义反思平衡(WRE)被认为是最重要的伦理证明方法,在科学界得到了广泛的讨论。然而,目前尚不清楚它在伦理文献中的实际应用程度。本文的目的是通过提供其显式应用的关键概述来填补这一空白。显性应用指的是遵循丹尼尔斯的定义,包含三个层次,命名它们的元素,并提供层次之间的联系的研究。检索了哲学家索引、ProQuest、PubMed、Web of Science和Scopus等明确使用WRE方法并以德语或英语撰写的研究。考虑了所有的主题、学科和出版形式。在19项研究中,WRE被应用了23次。在23个应用中,讨论了50个平衡态,19次报告达到了平衡态。作者将WRE应用于不同的学科、不同的目的和不同的主题。这些申请本身在申请程序和范围方面差别很大。特别是在调整过程的表述和所使用的WRE标准方面可以看到差异。结果表明,WRE可以成功应用,但显式应用的数量仍然很少。需要进一步研究将WRE发展成为一种既定的论证方法。特别是需要制定调整和WRE标准的标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Ethics
Journal of Ethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: The Journal of Ethics: An International Philosophical Review seeks to publish articles on a wide range of topics in ethics, philosophically construed, including such areas as ethical theory, social, political, and legal philosophy, applied ethics, meta-ethics, the metaphysics of morality, and the history of ethics. The Journal of Ethics publishes work from a wide variety of styles including but not limited to the analytic tradition and hermeneutics. The Journal of Ethics is also interested in ethical thinking that is enriched by psychology, sociology and other empirical disciplines. The Journal of Ethics is primarily an organ of philosophical research, although it publishes work on topics of concern to academics and professionals alike. The journal also seeks to publish the highest quality commentaries on works published in its pages. Its double-blind review process must ensure analytical acuity as well as depth and range of philosophical scholarship. At the moment, the journal does not publish book reviews.
期刊最新文献
Self-Inflicted Frankfurt-Style Cases and Flickers of Freedom Kant on the Normativity of Obligatory Ends Employers have a Duty of Beneficence to Design for Meaningful Work: A General Argument and Logistics Warehouses as a Case Study Moral Perception as Imaginative Apprehension 50 Years of Dirty Hands: An Overview
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1