Audio 1. We Want to Do a Few Things in This Lesson. Lets Start with the First Main Point

Audio 1. We want to do a few things in this Lesson. Lets start with the first main point. I mentioned my basic moral point of view; it’s a coherence view. I think this is a good teaching position as well as a good theoretical stance. It is good for teaching because it encourages me to take seriously a very wide variety of moral views. Nevertheless, I disagree with an exclusive emphasis on one view or the other. You might disagree with me. That’s fine, even healthy. But we are not interested in a debate. Instead we want to learn as much about moral theory as possible. I take a broad view on moral theory, and I hope that helps us to learn.

Audio 2. I’m going to spend a lot of time talking about what I call the moral domain and the moral range. I know that this is not standard terminology, and I certainly don’t want you to think it is. But I consider it helpful. Here is the point. Moral theory is controversial, in a way that scientific theory or mathematical theory are not. Of course, that means that it is tough to get agreement about moral theory. From this it follows, in my view, that we don’t have good ways, or agreed upon ways, to judge moral theory. I want to use the notion of a moral range and a moral domain as a possible way to come to some agreement. See what you think.

Audio 3. I don’t think you should worry much about the analogy between math and the domain and range of moral theory. What is important is to get a good inventory of the sorts of things we can do with moral theory. Many moral theories, in my view, are simply too limited. That’s partly why I’m more eclectic, borrowing from a variety of theories. As we go along in the course, think about the moral domain and range, and whether any theory we cover is fully adequate. That is, does it cover enough of the moral domain and range to count as a good theory?

Audio 4. In this section we very briefly look at the notion of a common morality, one we all share. I have my doubts about it all. So I need to explain why I’m including it. I think this is a good lead into our discussion about how we ought to judge, or to propose, a moral theory. We don’t just invent it. A theory has to make some sense. If there is a common morality, then perhaps all we need to do is to be loyal that morality, or at the least we need to show why that common morality is mistaken. I don’t think there is a common morality, so that notion won’t help much in defending or proposing a moral theory. But other philosophers think there is such a morality, and so it should be given careful consideration.