Authority, Excluded Reasons and Moral Conflict

Research output: Contribution to a Journal (Peer & Non Peer)Articlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

As a legitimate authoritative directive is a second-order reason, it defeats conflicting reasons by a process of exclusion. Nonetheless, a legitimate authoritative directive can be defeated by more weighty reasons, including, as I argue in this paper, the more weighty reasons it excludes. This is part of a value pluralist conception of authority, according to which there is no general rule for the resolution of conflicting reasons. And I advance this argument in response to the work of Joseph Raz. Although Raz is a value pluralist, he posits a general rule for the resolution of some conflicts: namely, that an exclusionary reason cannot be defeated by a (more weighty) reason it excludes. This represents a weak version of value pluralism. My argument is that Raz does not succeed in his efforts to show that this general rule either better ensures conformity with reason or that it is justified by commitment to autonomy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)353-374
Number of pages22
JournalDisputatio
Volume14
Issue number67
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2022

Keywords

  • authority
  • excluded reasons
  • exclusionary reasons
  • Joseph Raz
  • value pluralism

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Authority, Excluded Reasons and Moral Conflict'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this