Element contents
Series: Elements in Ethics
Thomas Reid on the Ethical Life
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 August 2020
Summary
This Element presents the rudiments of Thomas Reid's agency-centered ethical theory. According to this theory, an ethical theory must address three primary questions. What is it to be an agent? What is ethical reality like, such that agents could know it? And how can agents respond to ethical reality, commit themselves to being regulated by it, and act well in doing so? Reid's answers to these questions are wide-ranging, borrowing from the rational intuitionist, sentimentalist, Aristotelian, and Protestant natural law traditions. This Element explores how Reid blends together these influences, how he might respond to concerns raised by rival traditions, and specifies what distinguishes his approach from those of other modern philosophers.
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Series: Elements in EthicsOnline ISBN: 9781108756563Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 24 September 2020
References
Altham, J. E. J. 1986. “The Legacy of Emotivism.” In Macdonald, Graham and Wright, Crispin, eds. Fact, Science and Morality: Essays on A. J. Ayer’s Language, Truth and Logic. Oxford: Blackwell: 275–88.Google Scholar
Berker, Selim. 2019. “The Explanatory Ambitions of Moral Principles.” Noûs 53: 904–36.Google Scholar
Broadie, Alexander. 2000. “The Scotist Thomas Reid.” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 74: 385–407.Google Scholar
Butler, Bishop. 1729/2017. Fifteen Sermons and Other Writings on Ethics. Ed. David, McNaughton. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chisholm, Roderick. 2003. “Human Freedom and the Self.” In Watson, Gary, ed. Free Will, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 26–37.Google Scholar
Cuneo, Terence. 2008. “Intuitionism’s Burden: Reid on Moral Motivation.” The Journal of Scottish Philosophy 6: 21–43.Google Scholar
Cuneo, Terence. 2010. “Duty, Good, and God in Thomas Reid’s Ethics.” In Roeser, Sabine, ed. Reid on Ethics. New York: Palgrave McMillan: 238–57.Google Scholar
Cuneo, Terence. 2011. “A Puzzle Regarding Reid’s Theory of Motives.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 19: 963–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuneo, Terence. 2014. “Reid on the First Principles of Morals.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 41, Supplement 1: 102–21.Google Scholar
Cuneo, Terence, and Harp, Randall. 2017. “Reid on the Autonomy of Ethics: From Active Power to Moral Nonnaturalism.” Journal of the American Philosophical Association 2: 523–41.Google Scholar
Cuneo, Terence, and Harp, Randall. 2019. “Reid’s Regress.” Philosophical Quarterly 69: 678–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1980. Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Frankfurt, Harry. 1969. “Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility.” Journal of Philosophy 66: 829–39.Google Scholar
Frede, Michael. 1987. Essays in Ancient Philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Haakonssen, Knud. 2007. “Introduction.” In Haakonssen, Knud, ed. Thomas Reid on Practical Ethics: Lectures and Papers on Natural Religion, Self-government, Natural Jurisprudence and the Law of Nations. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Harris, James. 2013. “The Government of the Passions.” In Harris, James, ed. The Oxford Handbook of British Philosophy in the Eighteenth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 270–88.Google Scholar
Heydt, Colin. 2018. Moral Philosophy in 18th-Century Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1777/1987. Essays, Moral and Political. Ed. Miller, Eugene. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
Hurka, Thomas. 2014. British Ethical Theorists from Sidgwick to Ewing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kane, Robert. 2005. A Contemporary Introduction to Free Will. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine. 1996. The Sources of Normativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kroeker, Esther. 2014. “Reid’s Moral Psychology: Animal Motives as Guides to Virtue.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 41, Supplement 1: 122–55.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1690/1975. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Ed. Nidditch, Peter H.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Irwin, Terence. 2006. The Development of Ethics, Vol. II. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Little, Margaret. 1997. “Virtue as Knowledge: Objections from the Philosophy of Mind.” Noûs 31: 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1984. After Virtue, 2nd ed. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1988. Whose Justice? Which Rationality? Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1990. Three Rival Versions of Moral Inquiry. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Maurer, Christian. 2019. Self-love, Egoism, and the Selfish Hypothesis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, Mark. 2001. An Essay on Divine Authority. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
O’Connor, Timothy. 1994. “Thomas Reid on Free Agency.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 32: 605–22.Google Scholar
Poore, Gregory. 2015. “Theism, Coherence, and Justification in Thomas Reid’s Epistemology.” In Copenhaver, Rebecca and Buras, Todd, eds. Thomas Reid on Mind, Knowledge, and Value. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 213–31.Google Scholar
Radcliffe, Elizabeth S. 2018. Hume, Passion, and Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 2000. Lectures on the History of Ethics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Reid, Thomas. 1785/1997. An Inquiry into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense. Ed. Brookes, Derek R.. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press (abbreviated as IHM).Google Scholar
Reid, Thomas. 1785/2002. Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man. Ed. Brookes, Derek R., with annotations by Brookes, Derek R. and Haakonssen, Knud. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press (abbreviated as EIP).Google Scholar
Reid, Thomas. 1788/2010. Essays on the Active Powers of Man. Ed. Haakonssen, Knut and Harris, James. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press (abbreviated as EAP).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, Thomas. 1792/2001. “On Power.” The Philosophical Quarterly 51: 3–12 (abbreviated as OP).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, Thomas. 2002. The Correspondence of Thomas Reid. Ed. Wood, Paul. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press (abbreviated as Cor).Google Scholar
Reid, Thomas. 2007. Thomas Reid on Practical Ethics. Ed. Haakonssen, Knut. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press (abbreviated as PE).Google Scholar
Rosen, Gideon. 2017. “Metaphysical Relations in Metaethics.” In Plunkett, David and McPherson, Tristram, eds. The Routledge Handbook of Metaethics. New York: Routledge: 151–69.Google Scholar
Rowe, William. 1991. Thomas Reid on Freedom and Morality. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Schneewind, J. B. 1998. The Invention of Autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sehon, Scott. 2016. Free Will and Action Explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sidgwick, Henry. 1902. Outlines of the History of Ethics for English Readers. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
Turnbull, George. 1741/2008. “A Discourse upon the Nature and Origin of Moral and Civil Laws.” In Ahnert, T and Schroder, P, eds. A Methodical System of Universal Law by George Turnbull and J. G. A. Heineccius. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
Van Woudenberg, René. 2004. “Thomas Reid on Memory and the Identity of Persons.” In Cuneo, Terence and Van Woudenberg, René, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Thomas Reid. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 204–21.Google Scholar
Williams, Bernard. 1985. Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 2004. “Reid on Common sense.” In Cuneo, Terence and van Woudenberg, René, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Thomas Reid. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 77–100.Google Scholar
- 11
- Cited by