Moral Deference


You need to summarize the theory in the reading i will attach below, that will be the focus of my future essay, do that in your own words (while including appropriate references to the author). You also need to identify the main question or concern that i will raise about the theory that will motivate my next assignment, a large essay, which you will be able to do for me in the future.

Here are notes about the kind of question you should or can choose:

 • Your question should be a question that people can debate philosophically, rather than one that can be answered by appealing just to scientific data. (On the nature of philosophical questions, see the first lecture on power in Week 1.) • The question could focus on one key part of the theory you’re analyzing, which you need to IDENTIFY IN THE ARTICLE • The question should be one that you truly have about the theory: i.e., one that came up for you while reading the author’s piece. • The question should engage directly with the author of the theory. 

In the essay, you could either agree with how the author would/does respond to your question or you could disagree with them. You might decide that ultimately you do agree, in which case you’ll defend the author’s position against objections that others would raise to it. Alternatively, you might disagree with the author, in which case you should defend your own view against objections, that is, from the author and perhaps from others.

THIS IS THE LINKS TO THE READING THIS NEEDS TO BE ON (If it asks you to login, my username is vlexovsk, password is Vinnylex#78

The reading is called moral deference, by laurence thomas


Moral Deference

Suppose someone who has not experienced moral pain has successfully identified a member of a diminished social category. According to moral deference theory, as presented by Thomas (1993), it is appropriate for the person to believe what the member of a disadvantaged group says about a moral issue and understand their pain since they are speaking from a vantage point. Therefore, this theory suggests that nothing is problematic with differing to another person’s experiences about actions towards a given disadvantaged group. For instance, if one has never been robbed, it is not problematic to differ about the experiences and pain caused by such an event with a person who has ever been robbed. Additionally, we are likely to believe things based on testimony. Most of our beliefs about geographically distant and temporally events are mostly believed because we had someone else say so. However, we have different beliefs among these testimony-based beliefs. Not everyone can be differed to about any moral issues, but according to Thomas’s (1993) moral deference theory, generally differing to a person who belongs to a diminished social category on a matter involving the moral pain experienced in such a category is seen as appropriate.  

Thomas (1993) argues that without moral deference, one cannot successfully help those who have been hurt because one lacks the understanding of the nature of the moral pain experienced in a given disadvantaged group……………for help with this assignment contact us via email Address:

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *