BY
Prof. Chinenye L. Ochulor
Department of Philosophy
University of Calabar, Nigeria
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to determine if there is any basis for moral argument. The study commences with the assumption that for there to be moral argument, there must be a common standard on the basis of which all moral claims can be tested. The main concern of this study therefore, is to examine the possibility of moral argument. This involves effort to determine what constitutes, in essence, a moral act. Is there any basis for moral argument? Here the views of some logical positivists, empiricists and nominalists are considered. David Hume maintained that reason deceives us into believing that there is the possibility of all rational beings sharing in the same moral principle. On the part of those who argue for moral principle, the views of Plato, Aquinas and Kant are considered. We have used the ethical philosophy of Kant as the theoretical basis for this analysis. Kant's distinction between hypothetical and categorical imperative outlined the possibility of moral argument. Kant regarded the categorical imperative as the supreme moral principle with universal applicability. After a critical examination of the above Kantian position, we have arrived at the conclusion that it is the availability of such universal principle of conduct that creates room for moral argument.
KEYWORDS: Moral Argument, Moral Principle, Kant, Hypothesis, Categorical Imperative
THE POSSIBILITY OF MORAL ARGUMENT
.jpg)