Document Type
Paper
Start Date
15-5-1999 9:00 AM
End Date
17-5-1999 5:00 PM
Abstract
Care reasoning is valuable not because its nicer or kinder. Rather, it is the most reasonable way to come to terms with moral phenomena. Interpreting arguments requires making sense of the relationship between statements. Making sense of moral pheno mena requires making sense of relationships between (inherently indeterminate) moral subjects. Thus, the best reconstructions of moral problems will be realized in a medium (such as narrative) where meaningfulness is not undermined by indeterminacy. Fur ther, the rationality of care reasoning, which Gilligan calls narrative, can be appreciated by analogy with the rationale for the principle of charity in the interpretation of arguments.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Response to Submission
William Abbott, Commentary on Davies
Reader's Reactions
Jerome Bickenbach, Commentary on Danblon (May 1999)
Included in
Critical thinking, charity and care: reason and goodness both
Care reasoning is valuable not because its nicer or kinder. Rather, it is the most reasonable way to come to terms with moral phenomena. Interpreting arguments requires making sense of the relationship between statements. Making sense of moral pheno mena requires making sense of relationships between (inherently indeterminate) moral subjects. Thus, the best reconstructions of moral problems will be realized in a medium (such as narrative) where meaningfulness is not undermined by indeterminacy. Fur ther, the rationality of care reasoning, which Gilligan calls narrative, can be appreciated by analogy with the rationale for the principle of charity in the interpretation of arguments.
