Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Suspiciously convenient belief

  • Neil Levy*
  • *Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

    61 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Moral judgments entail or consist in claims that certain ways of behaving are called for. These actions have expectable consequences. I will argue that these consequences are suspiciously benign: on controversial issues, each side assesses these consequences, measured in dispute-independent goods, as significantly better than the consequences of behaving in the ways their opponents recommend. This remains the case even when we have not formed our moral judgment by assessing consequences. I will suggest that the evidence indicates that our perception of the consequences of acting as recommended by our moral judgments is motivated, such that the warrant of such assessments is lower than we might have thought. The suspicion correlation between our moral judgments and our assessments of the implicated facts provides higher-order evidence that should lead us to reduce our confidence in these assessments.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)899-913
    Number of pages15
    JournalEthical Theory and Moral Practice
    Volume23
    Issue number5
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Nov 2020

    Bibliographical note

    Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

    Keywords

    • Coincidence
    • Conciliationism
    • Higher-order evidence
    • Moral judgment

    Cite this