Abstract
Political commitments to resist oppression play a central role in the moral lives of many people. Such commitments are also a source of ethical reasons. They influence and organize ethical beliefs, emotions and reasons in an ongoing way. Political commitments to address oppression often contain a concern for the dignity and well-being of others and the objects of political commitments often have value, according to ideal moral theories, such as Kantian and utilitarian theory. However, ideal moral theories do not fully explain the ethical reasons political commitments engender. First, ideal moral theories do not explain the normative priority that agents give to politically committed ethical reasons. Their profound effect on a politically committed agent’s ethical deliberation and choice and the precedence they are given over other ends cannot be wholly understood through the moral obligations within ideal theories. Second, although politically committed reasons are valuable in ideal theory for the benefits they bring to others, they are not fungible with other reasons ideal theory would regard as having equal ethical value. A person might substitute another beneficial humanitarian aim for that to which she is politically committed and nevertheless regard herself as having done a morally wrong thing for failing or betraying her commitment. Politically committed ethical reasons are also motivated and informed by the social location of agents and their relationship to structures of oppression. Although there are universal ethical reasons to oppose oppression, this means that some of a person’s actual ethical reasons will be irreducibly particular.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Dancy, J. 1993. Moral Reasons (Oxford: Blackwell).
Dancy, J. 2004. Ethics Without Principles (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Henze, B.R. 2000. ‘Who Says Who Says: The Epistemological Grounds for Agency in Liberatory Political Projects.’ In P.M.L. Moya and M.R. Hames-Garcia (eds.), Reclaiming Identity: Realist Theory and the Predicament of Postmodernism (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp. 229–250.
Korsgaard, C. 1996. The Sources of Normativity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Mills, C. 2000. ‘Ideal Theory as Ideology.’ In P. DesAutels and M.U. Walker (eds.), Moral Psychology: Feminist Ethics and Social Theory (Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield), pp. 163–183.
Mohanty, S. 2000. ‘The Epistemic Status of Cultural Identity: On Beloved and the Postcolonial Condition.’ In P.M.L. Moya and M.R. Hames-Garcia (eds.), Reclaiming Identity: Realist Theory and the Predicament of Postmodernism (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp. 29–66.
Nagel, T. 1979. The Possibility of Altruism (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
Politkovskay, A. 2007. Putin’s Russia (New York: Holt Paperbacks).
Stocker, M. 1976. ‘The Schizophrenia of Modern Ethical Theories.’ Journal of Philosophy, 73 (14), 453–466.
Urban-Walker, M. 2005. Moral Contexts (New York: Rowman and Littlefield).
Urban-Walker, M. 2007. Moral Understandings: A Feminist Study in Ethics, Second Edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Williams, B. 1985. Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
Williams, B., and J.J.C. Smart. 1973. Utilitarianism, For and Against (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Young, I. 1990. Justice and the Politics of Difference (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
Acknowledgments
I am grateful to Daniel Fireside and Lisa Tessman for helpful comments on this paper as well as Lawrence Blum, Janet Farrell Smith, Sally Haslanger, Rae Langton, Nancy Bauer, Catherine McKeen and other members of MIT’s Working Group on Gender and Philosophy.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rivera, L. (2009). Ethical Reasons and Political Commitments. In: Tessman, L. (eds) Feminist Ethics and Social and Political Philosophy: Theorizing the Non-Ideal. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6841-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6841-6_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-6840-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-6841-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)