非个人主义道德的基础

Yitzhak Benbaji, D. Statman
{"title":"非个人主义道德的基础","authors":"Yitzhak Benbaji, D. Statman","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780199577194.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this chapter is to outline an alternative to Individualism and to show that moral rights can be taken seriously while acknowledging the role of organized societies in determining the actual distribution of moral rights and duties. In some cases, the rules accepted by such societies give content to what was indeterminate at the pre-contractual level. In others, they redistribute moral rights and duties among members of society. In both these ways, rights behave in a less rigid manner than that entailed by Individualism. To understand how social rules can determine rights, it is particularly helpful to look at the way social roles provide their holders with a permission to diverge from what would be required from them pre-contractually. In decent societies, holders of public roles typically have a right to fulfil their professional duty without deliberating on the merits of the case; namely, without being guided by first-order reasons that pertain to the cases with which they deal. This applies to combatants as well. In most cases, they have a right to disregard the first-order reasons pertaining to the justness of the war they are sent to fight. The responsibility for launching an unjust war lies on the shoulders of the politicians and not on those of combatants, just as the responsibility for sending an innocent person to jail rests with the court and not with the prison guards.","PeriodicalId":102911,"journal":{"name":"War By Agreement","volume":"64 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Foundations of a Non-Individualist Morality\",\"authors\":\"Yitzhak Benbaji, D. Statman\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780199577194.003.0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this chapter is to outline an alternative to Individualism and to show that moral rights can be taken seriously while acknowledging the role of organized societies in determining the actual distribution of moral rights and duties. In some cases, the rules accepted by such societies give content to what was indeterminate at the pre-contractual level. In others, they redistribute moral rights and duties among members of society. In both these ways, rights behave in a less rigid manner than that entailed by Individualism. To understand how social rules can determine rights, it is particularly helpful to look at the way social roles provide their holders with a permission to diverge from what would be required from them pre-contractually. In decent societies, holders of public roles typically have a right to fulfil their professional duty without deliberating on the merits of the case; namely, without being guided by first-order reasons that pertain to the cases with which they deal. This applies to combatants as well. In most cases, they have a right to disregard the first-order reasons pertaining to the justness of the war they are sent to fight. The responsibility for launching an unjust war lies on the shoulders of the politicians and not on those of combatants, just as the responsibility for sending an innocent person to jail rests with the court and not with the prison guards.\",\"PeriodicalId\":102911,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"War By Agreement\",\"volume\":\"64 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"War By Agreement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199577194.003.0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"War By Agreement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199577194.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章的目的是概述个人主义的另一种选择,并表明道德权利可以被认真对待,同时承认有组织的社会在决定道德权利和义务的实际分配方面的作用。在某些情况下,这些社会所接受的规则为在契约前一级不确定的内容提供了内容。在其他情况下,它们在社会成员之间重新分配道德权利和义务。在这两种情况下,权利的表现都不如个人主义所要求的那样严格。要理解社会规则是如何决定权利的,研究一下社会角色是如何为其持有者提供一种许可,允许他们偏离合同前的要求的,这是特别有帮助的。在体面的社会中,公共角色的持有者通常有权履行其专业职责,而无需考虑案件的是非曲直;也就是说,不受与他们所处理的案件有关的一阶原因的指导。这也适用于战斗人员。在大多数情况下,他们有权无视与他们被派去战斗的战争的正义性有关的首要理由。发动一场非正义战争的责任落在政治家的肩上而不是战士的肩上,正如将无辜者送进监狱的责任落在法庭而不是狱警身上一样。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Foundations of a Non-Individualist Morality
The purpose of this chapter is to outline an alternative to Individualism and to show that moral rights can be taken seriously while acknowledging the role of organized societies in determining the actual distribution of moral rights and duties. In some cases, the rules accepted by such societies give content to what was indeterminate at the pre-contractual level. In others, they redistribute moral rights and duties among members of society. In both these ways, rights behave in a less rigid manner than that entailed by Individualism. To understand how social rules can determine rights, it is particularly helpful to look at the way social roles provide their holders with a permission to diverge from what would be required from them pre-contractually. In decent societies, holders of public roles typically have a right to fulfil their professional duty without deliberating on the merits of the case; namely, without being guided by first-order reasons that pertain to the cases with which they deal. This applies to combatants as well. In most cases, they have a right to disregard the first-order reasons pertaining to the justness of the war they are sent to fight. The responsibility for launching an unjust war lies on the shoulders of the politicians and not on those of combatants, just as the responsibility for sending an innocent person to jail rests with the court and not with the prison guards.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Contractarianism and the Moral Equality of Civilians Foundations of a Non-Individualist Morality The Aims of Just Wars and Jus Ex Bello Concluding Remarks Contractarianism and the Moral Equality of Combatants
×
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