Ad
related to: james rachels cultural differences argument valid
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Rachels authored papers defending moral vegetarianism.His best known paper on the subject was The Basic Argument for Vegetarianism in 2004. Rachels proposed what he called the basic argument for vegetarianism which he believed is supported by a simple principle that every decent person accepts: it is wrong to cause pain unless there is a good enough reason.
The Elements of Moral Philosophy is a 1986 ethics textbook by the philosophers James Rachels and Stuart Rachels. [1] It explains a number of moral theories and topics, including cultural relativism, subjectivism, divine command theory, ethical egoism, social contract theory, utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, and deontology. The book uses real ...
[1] This chapter is well known for advancing two arguments against moral universalism: the argument from disagreement and the argument from queerness. The chapter is excerpted in the fourth (2007) edition of Stuart and James Rachels 's The Right Thing to Do: Basic Readings in Moral Philosophy .
Cultural relativism is the view that concepts and moral values must be understood in their own cultural context and not judged according to the standards of a different culture. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] It asserts the equal validity of all points of view and the relative nature of truth, which is determined by an individual or their culture.
Philosopher James Rachels posited that reverse discrimination as a factor in affirmative action in the United States may disadvantage some Whites, but without it, African Americans would likewise be disadvantaged by pervasive racial discrimination in society. [1]
First, some philosophers, notably Kant, argue that certain sorts of cognitive differences between human beings (or even all rational beings) are impossible, so such differences could never be found to obtain in fact, an argument that places a priori limits on what empirical inquiry could discover and on what versions of descriptive relativism ...
Philosopher Gilbert Harman considered "Famine, Affluence, and Morality" to be one of the most famous articles in ethics. [6] In 1981, philosopher James Rachels said of the article: "one felt intellectual interest in the argument, but also guilt for not having contributed more money to relieve starvation".
In recent years, versions of the argument have been put forward by Peter Singer, [9] Tom Regan, [10] Evelyn Pluhar, [11] and Oscar Horta. [5] James Rachels has argued that the theory of evolution implies that there is only a gradient between humans and other animals, and therefore marginal-case humans should be considered similar to non-human ...