TITLE:
How to Defend a Normative Ethical Theory
AUTHORS:
Keith Burgess-Jackson
KEYWORDS:
Ethics, Metaethics, Normative Ethics, Theory, Argumentation, Ethical Egoism
JOURNAL NAME:
Open Journal of Philosophy,
Vol.11 No.2,
May
12,
2021
ABSTRACT: This article is a work of metaethics; it is on, but not in,
normative ethics. My aim is to explain how one goes about defending a normative
ethical theory. Specifically, it is to explain how one goes about providing (what
I call) “a complete defense” of a normative ethical theory. A complete defense
has five components, which I call “underpinning,” “undermining,”
“countermining,” “attacking,” and “repelling.” I explain and illustrate each
component, using the normative ethical theory of egoism as an example. I then
discuss three important distinctions. The first is between ideal complete defenses and non-ideal (or real-world) complete
defenses. The second is between complete defenses (whether ideal or
non-ideal) and incomplete (or partial) defenses. The third is
between successful defenses (whether complete or incomplete) and unsuccessful defenses.