Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-568f69f84b-l2zqg Total loading time: 0.185 Render date: 2021-09-17T05:42:27.727Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

L’avenir contextualiste du constructivisme métaéthique : le constructivisme humien amendé

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2018

JOCELYN MACLURE*
Affiliation:
Université Laval
*Corresponding

Abstract

I defend a version of what Sharon Street has dubbed “Humean constructivism.” I’ll first sketch out why I think that contextual constructivism provides us with a more plausible understanding of the ontological status of values than both Kantian constructivism and moral realism. In addition to its recognition of the role of evolutionary pressures in the emergence of human morality, contextual constructivism must now clarify the role of historical intersubjectivity in the subsequent development of morality. I will then claim that adding a coherentist module to Humean constructivism provides a satisfactory answer to those who fear that contextual metaethical theories can only be non-cognitivist. Finally, I will sketch out why I think that the notion of a mind-independent “space of moral reasons” is largely compatible with Humean constructivism.

Je défends dans ce texte une version particulière de la position que Sharon Street a appelée le «constructivisme humien». J’esquisserai pourquoi je considère que ce constructivisme est préférable à la fois au réalisme moral et au constructivisme kantien sur le plan de la compréhension du statut ontologique des valeurs. Après avoir accepté de reconnaître le rôle des pressions de l’évolution dans l’émergence de la moralité, le constructivisme humien doit toutefois préciser le rôle de l’intersubjectivité historique dans l’évolution subséquente de la morale. J’expliquerai aussi pourquoi je considère que l’intégration d’un volet cohérentiste au constructivisme permet d’atténuer les craintes concernant le caractère potentiellement non-cognitiviste des théories contextualistes. Enfin, j’esquisserai pourquoi l’idée d’un «espace des raisons morales» indépendant, à certains égards, de l’esprit humain est compatible avec le constructivisme humien.

Type
Dossier : Le constructivisme métaéthique / Metaethical Constructivism
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alfred, Gerald R. 1995 Heeding the Voices of Our Ancestors, Toronto/New York (NY), Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Appiah, Kwame Anthony 2008 Experiments in Ethics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Aubé Beaudoin, Félix 2014 Faits moraux et évolution : un dilemme pour le réalisme moral, mémoire de maîtrise, Université Laval, disponible en ligne : <http://theses.ulaval.ca/archimede/meta/30741>.Google Scholar
Bagnoli, Carla 2017 «Constructivism in Metaethics», dans Zalta, Edward N., dir., The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy [en ligne], <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/constructivism-metaethics/> (édition automne 2017).Google Scholar
Darwall, Stephen, Gibbard, Allan et Railton, Peter 1992 «Toward Fin de siècle Ethics: Some Trends», The Philosophical Review, vol. 101, no 1, p. 115189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennett, Daniel C. 2017 From Bacteria to Bach and Back: the Evolution of Minds, New York (NY), W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Desmons, Ophélie 2013 Les présupposés du libéralisme politique : quelle justification? John Rawls et l’hypothèse herméneutique, thèse de doctorat, Université de Lille 3 en cotutelle avec l’Université Laval, disponible en ligne : <http://www.theses.fr/2013LIL30021>.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald 1996 «Objectivity and Truth: You’d Better Believe It», Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 25, no 2, p. 87139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabriel, Markus 2014 Pourquoi le monde n’existe pas, Paris, Lattès.Google Scholar
Greene, Joshua 2013 Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them, New York (NY), Penguin Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1987 Théorie de l’agir communicationnel, traduit par Ferry, J.-M. et Schlegel, J.-L., Paris, Fayard.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1991 De l’éthique de la discussion, Paris, Flammarion.Google Scholar
Heath, Joseph 2012 «Letting the World In: Empirical Approaches to Ethics», Les ateliers de l’éthique, vol. 7, no 3, p. 93107.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. 1965 La raison dans l’histoire : introduction à la Philosophie de l’histoire, traduit par Papaioannou, K., Paris, Plon.Google Scholar
Honneth, Axel 2000 La lutte pour la reconnaissance, Paris, Cerf.Google Scholar
Hunyadi, Mark 2008 Morale contextuelle, Québec, Presses de l’Université Laval.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Jonathan A. 2008 Dimensions of Moral Theory. An Introduction to Metaethics and Moral Psychology, New York (NY), Wiley.Google Scholar
Joyce, Richard 2006 The Evolution of Morality, Cambridge (MA)/Londres, MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel 2011 Thinking, Fast and Slow, Londres, Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel 1992 Fondements de la métaphysique des mœurs [1785], traduit par Delbos, V., Paris, Vrin.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Philip 2011 The Ethical Project, Cambridge (MA)/Londres, Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laden, Anthony Simon 2012 Reasoning: A Social Picture, Oxford, Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larmore, Charles 2004 «Une éthique des raisons», dans Débat sur l’éthique, Paris, Grasset.Google Scholar
Larmore, Charles 2008 The Autonomy of Morality, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maclure, Jocelyn 2006 «On the Public Use of Practical Reason: Loosening the Grip of Neo-Kantianism», Philosophy & Social Criticism, vol. 32, no 1, p. 3763.Google Scholar
Maclure, Jocelyn 2012 «La philosophie politique analytique et ses critiques», dans Giroux, D. et Karmis, D., dir., Ceci n’est pas une idée politique. Réflexions sur les approches à l’étude des idées politiques, Québec, Presses de l’Université Laval.Google Scholar
Manne, Kate 2013 «On Being Social in Metaethics», dans Shafer-Landau, R., dir., Oxford Studies in Metaethics, vol. 8.Google Scholar
Miller, Alex 2003 An Introduction to Contemporary Metaethics, Cambridge, Polity Press.Google Scholar
Moody-Adams, Michele M. 2002 Fieldwork in Familiar Places: Morality, Culture, and Philosophy, Cambridge, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Moody-Adams, Michele M. 2016 «Moral Progress and Human Agency», Ethical Theory & Moral Practice, vol. 20, p. 153168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogien, Ruwen 1999 «Qu’est-ce que le réalisme moral?» dans Le réalisme moral, Paris, Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
O’Neill, Onora 1989 Constructions of Reason, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pinkard, Terry 2017 Does History Make Sense? Hegel on the Historical Shapes of Justice, Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, Hilary 2002 The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays, Cambridge, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John 1951 «Outline of a Decision Procedure for Ethics», The Philosophical Review, vol. 60, no 2, p. 177197.Google Scholar
Rawls, John 1971 A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John 1980 «Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory», The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 77, no 9, p. 515572.Google Scholar
Rawls, John 1995 Libéralisme politique [1993], traduit par Audard, C., Paris, Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Rorty, Richard 1989 Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity, Cambridge/New York (NY), Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scanlon, T. M. 1982 «Contractualism and Utilitarianism», dans Sen, A. K. et Williams, B. A. O., dir., Utilitarianism and Beyond, New York (NY)/Paris, Cambridge University Press/Éditions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, p. 103-128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scanlon, Thomas M. 2000 What We Owe to Each Other, Cambridge, Belknap.Google Scholar
Scanlon, Thomas M. 2014 Being Realistic about Reasons, Oxford, Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, John 2011 Making the Social World: The Structure of Human Civilization, New York (NY), Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Singer, Peter 2011 The Expanding Circle: Ethics and Sociobiology, Princeton (NJ), Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Stanovich, Keith 2011 Rationality and the Reflective Mind, Oxford/New York (NY), Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Street, Sharon 2006 «A Darwinian Dilemma for Realist Theories of Value», Philosophical Studies, vol. 12, no 1, p. 109166.Google Scholar
Street, Sharon 2010 «What is Constructivism in Ethics and Metaethics?» Philosophy Compass, vol. 5, no 5, p. 363384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Street, Sharon 2016 «Objectivity and Truth: You’d Better Rethink It», dans Shafer-Landau, R., dir., Oxford Studies in Metaethics, vol. 11, p. 293333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Charles 1977 «What is Human Agency?» dans T. Mischel, dir., The Self: Psychological and Philosophical Issues, Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles 1994 «The Politics of Recognition», dans Gutmann, A., dir., Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition, Princeton (NJ), Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles 2004 Modern Social Imaginaries, Durham (NC), Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael 2009 Why We Cooperate, Cambridge, MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tully, James 2008 «The Struggles for Indigenous Peoples for and of Freedom», dans Public Philosophy in a New Key, vol. 1, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 257288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turmel, Patrick et Rocheleau-Houle, David 2016 «Le constructivisme est-il une métaéthique?» Revue de métaphysique et de morale, vol. 91, no 3, p. 353376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waal, Frans de, Macedo, Stephen et Ober, Josiah 2006 Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved, Princeton (NJ), Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
3
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

L’avenir contextualiste du constructivisme métaéthique : le constructivisme humien amendé
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

L’avenir contextualiste du constructivisme métaéthique : le constructivisme humien amendé
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

L’avenir contextualiste du constructivisme métaéthique : le constructivisme humien amendé
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *