Publication: Critical Normativity
Open/View Files
Date
2009
Authors
Published Version
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Springer
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.
Citation
Joseph W. Singer, Critical Normativity, 20 Law and Critique 27 (2009).
Research Data
Abstract
Skeptics argue that statements about right and wrong are merely expressions of preferences. They are mistaken; values are not the same as mere preferences. When we assert preferences that affect others, we justify our actions by giving reasons that we believe others should accept. When we evaluate those reasons, we typically reject certain preferences as illegitimate. Values are different from preferences because they entail demands we feel entitled to make of each other, after critical reflection. But this does not require us to become moral realists who base value judgments on the existence of moral facts. Critical normativity adopts the paradoxical stance that value judgments are based on human will but that they can be right or wrong. Human beings cannot live without strong normative claims but we are obligated to be careful about them. This article illustrates this stance by telling three parables of justice.
Description
Other Available Sources
Keywords
legal theory, critical theory, postmodernism, fairness
Terms of Use
This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service