‘Dirty Hands’: Guilt and Regret in Moral Reasoning

Nigel Biggar argues against ‘dirty hands’ reasoning for two reasons. The first is that dirty hands reasoning is paradoxical. The second is that ‘dirt’ in dirty hands is often—and wrongly—conceived as guilt. According to Biggar, the dirt should instead be understood as regret. In this article, I defe...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Gingles, Dallas J. (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Lade...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Veröffentlicht: Sage 2023
In: Studies in Christian ethics
Jahr: 2023, Band: 36, Heft: 1, Seiten: 107-122
RelBib Classification:NCB Individualethik
ZD Psychologie
weitere Schlagwörter:B Regret
B Moral emotions
B Dirty Hands
B Guilt
B Nigel Biggar
B Moral Reasoning
Online Zugang: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Nigel Biggar argues against ‘dirty hands’ reasoning for two reasons. The first is that dirty hands reasoning is paradoxical. The second is that ‘dirt’ in dirty hands is often—and wrongly—conceived as guilt. According to Biggar, the dirt should instead be understood as regret. In this article, I defend dirty hands reasoning against both criticisms. On the one hand, I argue that dirty hands reasoning is not necessarily paradoxical. On the other, I argue that, because guilt, more than regret, is meant to motivate the agent we should prefer a prima facie interpretation of the ‘dirt’ in dirty hands as guilt instead of regret.
ISSN:0953-9468
Enthält:Enthalten in: Studies in Christian ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1177/09539468221116300