dc.contributor.author | Birondo, Noell N. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2016-04-29T19:11:21Z | |
dc.date.available | 2016-04-29T19:11:21Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2016-04-01 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Birondo, Noell N. 2016. Virtue and prejudice: giving and taking reasons. Monist, vol. 99:no. 2:pp 212-223 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0026-9662 | |
dc.identifier.other | WOS:000372486900008 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/monist/onv037 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10057/12025 | |
dc.description | Click on the DOI link to access the article (may not be free). | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | The most long-standing criticism of virtue ethics in its traditional, eudaimonistic variety centers on its apparently foundational appeal to nature in order to provide a source of normativity. This paper argues that a failure to appreciate both the giving and taking of reasons in sustaining an ethical outlook can distort a proper understanding of the available options for this traditional version of virtue ethics. To insist only on giving reasons, without also taking (maybe even considering) the reasons provided by others, displays a sadly illiberal form of prejudice. The paper finds and criticizes such a distortion in Jesse Prinz's recent discussion of the "Normativity Challenge" to Aristotelian virtue ethics, thus highlighting a common tendency that we can helpfully move beyond. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.publisher | Oxford University Press | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Monist;v.99:no.2 | |
dc.title | Virtue and prejudice: giving and taking reasons | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.rights.holder | © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Hegeler Institute. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com | en_US |