Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A plea for modelling in ethics
Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Philosophy. Institute for Futures Studies, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4370-7201
Number of Authors: 22025 (English)In: Synthese, ISSN 0039-7857, E-ISSN 1573-0964, Vol. 205, no 1, article id 42Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

We present an argument about the methodology of ethics, broadly conceived, drawing on recent research on modelling in the philosophy of science. More specifically, we argue that normative ethics should adopt the methodology of modelling. We make our case in two parts. First, despite the perhaps unfamiliar terminology, modelling already happens in ethics. We identify it, and argue that its practice could be improved by recognising that it is modelling and by adopting some methodological lessons from philosophy of science. Second, modelling should be adopted more widely within normative ethics, because it fits well with various methodological ends we shall identify. Models can be used to investigate ethical questions in a manner that is systematic but relatively free of foundational theoretical commitments in first-order ethics. Models are more local, and less ambitious, than theories. They can be used to break deadlocks, by focusing attention on the particularities of a sub-domain and by providing a common tool–the surrogate model system–which each side can use to make their principles precise, illustrate the implications of their view, and identify sources of disagreement or points of agreement. We are pluralists about method, so this is not a call to abandon other philosophical methods. It is simply a plea for modelling, motivated by the method’s independent benefits and its fruitfulness in resolving some persistent methodological problems in ethics.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2025. Vol. 205, no 1, article id 42
Keywords [en]
Ethical disagreement, Methodology of ethics, Modelling, Philosophy of science, Policy decisions
National Category
Ethics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-240106DOI: 10.1007/s11229-024-04864-wISI: 001396646200003Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85217388909OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-240106DiVA, id: diva2:1942706
Available from: 2025-03-06 Created: 2025-03-06 Last updated: 2025-03-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Bykvist, Krister

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Bykvist, Krister
By organisation
Department of Philosophy
In the same journal
Synthese
Ethics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 53 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf