Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Direct vs. Indirect moral enhancement
Authors: Schaefer G.O. 
Issue Date: 2015
Publisher: Johns Hopkins University Press
Citation: Schaefer G.O. (2015). Direct vs. Indirect moral enhancement. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 25 (3) : 261-289. ScholarBank@NUS Repository.
Abstract: Moral enhancement is an ostensibly laudable project. Who wouldn’t want people to become more moral? Still, the project’s approach is crucial. We can distinguish between two approaches for moral enhancement: direct and indirect. Direct moral enhancements aim at bringing about particular ideas, motives or behaviors. Indirect moral enhancements, by contrast, aim at making people more reliably produce the morally correct ideas, motives or behaviors without committing to the content of those ideas, motives and/or actions. I will argue, on Millian grounds, that the value of disagreement puts serious pressure on proposals for relatively widespread direct moral enhancement. A more acceptable path would be to focus instead on indirect moral enhancements while staying neutral, for the most part, on a wide range of substantive moral claims. I will outline what such indirect moral enhancement might look like, and why we should expect it to lead to general moral improvement. © 2015 by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Source Title: Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal
ISSN: 10546863
DOI: 10.1353/ken.2015.0016
Appears in Collections:Elements
Staff Publications

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
Direct vs. Indirect moral enhancement.pdf218.05 kBAdobe PDF




checked on Sep 19, 2019

Page view(s)

checked on Sep 19, 2019

Google ScholarTM



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.