4 ms·
I am not confident in this study. Anyone who has studied in the area knows that there's self-sorting by field, which runs, from most to least conservative: Eth
by Emma_Goldman 3y ago
I am not confident in this study.
Anyone who has studied in the area knows that there's self-sorting by field, which runs, from most to least conservative: Ethics < political philosophy < political theory. Most 'activist' philosophers are in politics and sociology departments, not philosophy departments. In both cases the tendency runs from the most abstract and rationalist, to the most concrete and political.
The study also begs the question about what is and is not moral. It finds that professional ethicists judge that not keeping in contact with one's mother is less morally reprehensible than do other academics. And, on the strength of this and other, similar judgements, conclude that non-ethicist academics have more stringent moral beliefs. Well - maybe the ethicists are right? Whether greater 'leniency' or 'stringency' is appropriate in any given case is relative to one's ethical beliefs, not a scientific given to be assumed at the outset of the study.
- lapcat 3y ago> Anyone who has studied in the area knows that there's self-sorting by field, which runs, from most to least conservative: Ethics < political philosophy < political theory. Most 'activist' philosophers are in politics and sociology departments, not philosophy departments. Citation needed. I have studied in the area, with multiple degrees in philosophy and political science, but I don't know what you claim that I know.