Anscombe's Virtues: Simply Wrong? I don't often teach Introduction to Ethics, but when I do I have students read G. E. M. Anscombe's ``Modern Moral Philosophy'' about three quarters of the way through the semester, after they've had a chance to read Aristotle, Kant and Mill. Anscombe refers to each of these thinkers in her paper, but not necessarily in the most convincing or even fair way. Her attack on Kant always gets a smile (``Kant introduces the idea of 'legislating for oneself', which is as absurd as if in these days, when majority votes command great respect, one were to call each reflective decision a man made a vote resulting in a majority, which as a matter of proportionality is always overwhelming, for it is always 1-0.'') The value of this exercise is that after at least ten weeks of carefully trying to understand the positions of the each of the previous, Anscombe provides a model for making comparisons and critical judgements. The students in my classes generally don't accept Anscombe's conclusions, but she always refreshes the interactions in the class. Anyway, there's a discussion of this paper over at Leiter Reports. (Guest Blogger William Edmundson Oct. 17-23: Anscombe's Virtues: Simply Wrong?)  ¶ #

0 comments Post a Comment