Critical Analysis of Flanagan's Moral Naturalism

Document Type : Original Article


استادیار گروه اخلاق، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران


In the article “Naturalization of Morality”, Flanagan explains a kind of moral naturalism and considers the most sensible kind of moral naturalism to be neo-compatibilism. According to this kind of naturalism, free will is compatible with determinism, but this is not in conflict with the moral responsibility; however, it is along with a kind of scientific determinism. In his article, Flanagan responds to Hume and Moore's critique of moral naturalism. He does not shy away from his desired moral naturalism leading to a kind of relativism and nihilism; because in any case, he considers value and goodness to be related to humans and their ecology. The present study first reports on the nature of moral naturalism in Flanagan’s thought. In the following, the cases of strengthening and criticizing Flanagan’s point of view by Casebeer, Ruse, and Railton will be discussed. Finally, ontological, epistemological, and motivational criticisms, as well as criticisms aimed at accepting relativism and moral nihilism on the nature of naturalism considered by Flanagan will be presented.


Article Title [Persian]

تحلیل انتقادی طبیعت‌گرائی اخلاقی مورد نظر فلانگان

Author [Persian]

  • بهروز محمدی منفرد
Assistant Professor, Department of Ethics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract [Persian]

فلانگان در مقاله طبیعی کردن اخلاق، نوعی طبیعت‌گرائی اخلاقی را تبیین نموده و معقول‌ترین گونه طبیعت-گرائی اخلاقی را نوسازگارگرائی می‌داند. براساس این نوع طبیعت‌گرائی، اراده آزاد با تعیّن‌گرائی سازگار بوده و شاهد نوعی تعیّن‌گرائی علمی، در عین مسئولیت اخلاقی خواهیم بود. فلانگان در مقاله خود نقدهای هیوم و مور در مقابل طبیعت‌گرائی اخلاقی را پاسخ می‌دهند و از منتهی شدن طبیعت‌گرائی اخلاقی مورد نظر خویش به نوعی نسبیت‌گرائی و نیهیلیسم ابائی ندارد، زیرا در هر حال ارزش و خوبی را وابسته به انسان و اکولوژی آن می‌دانند. پژوهش حاضر ابتدا گزارشی از ماهیت طبیعی‌گرائی اخلاقی در اندیشه فلانگان بیان می‌کند. در ادامه از موارد تقویت و نقد کسبییر و راس و ریلتن در قبال دیدگاه فلانگان سخن گفته می‌شود و در نهایت نقدهائی هستی‌شناسانه، معرفت‌شناسانه و انگیزشی و همچنین نقدهائی معطوف به پذیرش نسبی‌گرائی و نیهیلیسم اخلاقی بر ماهیت طبیعت‌گرائی اخلاقی مورد نظر فلانگان ارائه می‌شود.

Keywords [Persian]

  • فلانگان
  • طبیعت‌گرائی اخلاقی
  • اراده آزاد
  • تعین‌گرائی
Audi, Robert. (1999). “Naturalism” in: The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
Casebeer, William D. (2008). Three Cheers for Naturalistic Ethics, in: Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Moral Psychology (V1). London: MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Dewey, John. (1922). Human Nature and Conduct: An introduction to Social Psychology. NewYork: Modern Library.
Flanagan, Owen; Hagop Sarkissian; David Wong. (2008a). “Naturalizing Ethics” in Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Moral Psychology (V1), pp. 1-27. London: MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Flanagan, Owen; Hagop Sarkissian; David Wong. (2008b). “What is the nature of morality? A response to Casebeer, Railton, and Ruse Owen”, in Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Moral Psychology(V1), London, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Flanagan, Owen. (1996). “Ethics Naturalized: Ethics as Human Ecology” in Mind and Morals: Essays on Cognitive Science and Ethics, edited by Larry May, Marilyn Friedman and Andy Clark, Cambridge, MIT Press: 19-24.
Flanagan, Owen. (2006). “Varieties of naturalism”, In Philip Clayton & Zachory Simpson (ed.)The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Science. Oxford University Press: 430-452.
Flanagan, Owen. (2002). The Problem of The Soul: Two Visions of Mind And How to Reconcile Them. New York: Basic Books.
Flanagan, Owen. (2011), The Bodhisattva’s Brain: Buddhism Naturalized. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press
Honderich, Ted. (1995), The Oxford Companion to philosophy. Oxford University Press.
Kim, Jaegwon. (1988). “What is naturalized epistemology?” Philosophical Perspectives, (2): 381–405.
Kim, Jaegwon. (1993). Supervenience and Mind: Selected Philosophical Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kitcher, Philip (1992). “The Naturalist Return”, Philosophical Review, (101): 53-114.
Lewis, David. (1983). Philosophical Papers, Volume 1. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Papineau, Davidn D.  “Moral Naturalism”, Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy, First published Thu Jun 1, 2006; substantive revision Mon Aug 7, 2006. › entries › naturalism-moral
Putnam, Hilary. (1993). “Why reason can’t be naturalized. In his Philosophical
papers: Vol. 3. Realism and Reason (pp. 229–247). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Quine, W. V. O. (1969). “Epistemology Naturalized” in: Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, pp. 69–90. New York: Columbia University Press.
Quine, W. V. O. (1981). Theories and Things. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Quine, W.V.O. (1993), “Two Dogmas of Empricism” in: The Theory of Knowledge, (ed. L. Pojman) Belmont. Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Railton, Peter, (2008), “Naturalism Relativized?” in: Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Moral Psychology (V1), London: MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Rosenberg, Alexander. (1996). “A Field Guide to Recent Species of Naturalism”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 47: 1-29.
Ruse, Michael. (2008). “Response to Duke Naturalists,” in Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Moral Psychology (V1), London: The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Seidel, Markus, (2014), Epistemic Relativism. A Constructive Critique, Palgrave – Macmillan.
 Smilansky, Saul. (2003). “Compatibilism: The Argument from Shallowness.” Philosophical Studies, 115 (3):257-282.
Stroud, Barry. (1996). “The charm of naturalism.” Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Society, 70: 43–55.