Moral Obligation as a Conclusive Reason: On Bernard Williams’ Critique of the Morality System

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

Abstract

Bernard Williams’ critique of the morality system, as illustrated in his reading of Aeschylus’ Agamemnon, is intended to show both that real moral conflicts can arise, and that a moral obligation is merely one reason among others and can be defeated by the thick concepts of a shared ethical life. In response, I want to advance two lines of argument. First, when Williams argues that a moral obligation can be the locus of moral conflict, a further step is required to explain why one should feel regret for not acting on a defeated reason. Second, Williams presupposes that, when a conflict is resolved, the conclusive reason will be a thick ethical concept, but there is no compelling justification for that assumption.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)425-434
Number of pages10
JournalTopoi
Volume43
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2024

Keywords

  • Bernard Williams
  • Conflict
  • Moral obligation
  • Morality system
  • Necessity

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Moral Obligation as a Conclusive Reason: On Bernard Williams’ Critique of the Morality System'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this