Promising to Do Wrong
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31273/reinvention.v12i1.442Keywords:
Promising, justifying strength, requiring strength, two dimensions of reason, Holly Smith, Earl ConeeAbstract
We commonly think that promising creates reason for us to act. If I promise to have lunch with you, there will then be reason in favour of me doing so, and there will also be reason against me doing anything else. But this seemingly plausible view generates a puzzle: if making a promise gives us reason to do something, moral agents can sometimes promise to fulfil a less weighty obligation, and thereby ensure that they will do all they ought to do by fulfilling this obligation. Call this the puzzle of suboptimal promises. In this paper, I examine and reject two proposals for responding to this puzzle, before presenting my own solution. I argue that we should conceptualise promising with reference to what Joshua Gert calls the ‘justifying/requiring strength’ of reason. In particular, when an agent S promises to do something, the requiring strength of doing that thing increases in virtue of the promise.
References
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors are responsible for obtaining permission from copyright holders for reproducing through any medium of communication those illustrations, tables, figures or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere. Authors are also responsible for adding these permissions to the acknowledgement footnote that precedes all other notes or crediting the source and copyright of photographs or figures in the accompanying captions.
The journal's policy is to ask authors to grant us the licence to publish their work, which gives us the exclusive right both to reproduce and/or distribute their article (including the abstract) in printed, electronic or any other medium, and in turn to authorise others (including Reproduction Rights Organisations such as the Copyright Licensing Agency and the Copyright Clearance Center) to do the same. In return the author(s) assert their Moral Right to be identified as the author, and we promise that we will respect their rights as the author(s). That is, we will make sure that their name(s) is/are always clearly associated with the article and, while they do allow us to make necessary editorial changes, we will not make any substantial alteration to their article without consulting them.
Copyright remains with the author(s), however, the author(s) authorise us to act on their behalf to defend their copyright if anyone should infringe it, and to retain half of any damages awarded, after deducting our costs. The author(s) also retain the right to use their own article (provided they acknowledge the published original in standard bibliographic citation form) in the following ways, as long as they do not sell it or give it away in ways which would conflict directly with our interests. The author(s) is/are free to use their article for the internal educational or other purposes of their own institution or company; mounted on their own or their institution’s website; posted to free public servers of preprints and/or articles in their subject area; or in whole or in part, as the basis for their own further publications or spoken presentations.
If you have any queries about copyright please contact reinventionjournal@warwick.ac.uk
