Skip to main content
Log in

Ethics and Social Science: Which Kind of Co-operation?

  • Published:
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The relation between ethics and social science is often conceived as complementary, both disciplines cooperating in the solution of concrete moral problems. Against this, the paper argues that not only applied ethics but even certain parts of general ethics have to incorporate sociological and psychological data and theories from the start. Applied ethics depends on social science in order to asses the impact of its own principles on the concrete realities which these principles are to regulate as well as in order to propose practice rules suited to adapt these principles to their respective contexts of application. Examples from medical ethics (embryo research) and ecological ethics (Leopold's land ethic) illustrate both the contingence of practice rules in relation to their underlying basic principles and the corresponding need for a co-operation between philosophy and empirical disciplines in judging their functional merits and demerits. In conclusion, the relevance of empirical hypotheses even for some of the ‘perennial’ problems of ethics is shown by clarifying the role played by empirical theories in the controversies about the ethical differentiation between positive and negative responsibility and the relation between utility maximisation and (seemingly) independent criteria of distributive justice in the context of social distributions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Bedau, H. A., Justice and classical utilitarianism, in C.J. Friedrich and J.W. Chapman (eds.), Justice. New York: Atherton Press, 1963, pp. 284–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birnbacher, D., Tun und Unterlassen. Stuttgart: Reclam, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callicott, J.B., The conceptual foundations of the Land Ethic, in J.B. Callicott (ed.), A companion to A Sand County Almanac. Interpretative and critical essays. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987, pp. 186–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edgeworth, F.Y., Mathematical psychics. London: Kegan Paul, 1881.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld, D., The Arrogance of Humanism. New York: Oxford University Press, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J., Local Justice. How Institutions Allocate Resources and Necessary Burdens. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I., Ñber den Gemeinspruch: Das Mag in der Theorie Richtig Sein, Taugt Aber Nicht für die Praxis, in Kants Werke, Akademie-Ausgabe Bd. 8. Berlin: Reimer, 1923, pp. 273–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keown, J., Euthanasia in the Netherlands: sliding down the slippery slope? In J. Keown (ed.), Euthanasia Examined. Ethical, Clinical and Legal Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, pp. 261–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhse, H., Voluntary Euthanasia in the Netherlands and Slippery Slopes. Bioethics News 11(4) (1992), pp. 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leopold, A., The Land Ethic, in A. Leopold (ed.), A Sand County Almanac and Sketches Here and There. New York: Oxford University Press, 1949, pp. 201–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., Distributive Justice: What the People Think. Ethics 102 (1992), pp. 555–593.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rescher, N., Distributive Justice. A Constructive Critique of the Utilitarian Theory of Distribution. Indianapolis/New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. H., Bounded justice. Social Science Information 33 (1994), pp. 305–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slote, M. A., The morality of wealth, in W. Aiken, H. La Follette (eds.), World Hunger and Moral Obligation. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1977, pp. 124–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, C. D., Earth and Other Ethics. The Case for Moral Pluralism. New York: Harper & Row, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trapp, R.W., "Nicht-klassischer" Utilitarismus. Eine Theorie der Gerechtigkeit. Frankfurt/ M.: Klostermann, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trapp, R.W., 'Utilitarianism Incorporating Justice' - A Decentralised Model of Ethical Decision Making. Erkenntnis 32 (1990), pp. 341–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • WaIzer, M., Spheres of Justice. A Defence of Pluralism and Equality. New York: Basic Books, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, B., A critique of utilitarianism, in J. J. C. Smart, B. Williams Utilitarianism for and Against. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973, pp. 77–150

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Birnbacher, D. Ethics and Social Science: Which Kind of Co-operation?. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2, 319–336 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009903815157

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009903815157

Navigation