Faculty of Arts and Education, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia.
Nurs Ethics. 2011 Mar;18(2):149-60. doi: 10.1177/0969733010388927.
The argument of this article is framed by a debate between the principle of humanity and the principle of justice. Whereas the principle of humanity requires us to care about others and to want to help them meet their vital needs, and so to be partial towards those others, the principle of justice requires us to consider their needs without the intrusion of our subjective interests or emotions so that we can act with impartiality. I argue that a deep form of caring lies behind both approaches and so unites them. In the course of the argument, I reject Michael Slote's sentimentalist form of an ethics of care, and expound Thomas Nagel's moral theory, which seems to lie at the opposite end of a spectrum ranging from moral sentiments to impersonal objectivity. Nevertheless, Nagel's theory of normative realism provides unexpected support for the thesis that a deep and subjective form of caring lies at the base of even our most objective moral reasons.
本文的论点是在人道主义原则和正义原则之间的争论中构建的。虽然人道主义原则要求我们关心他人,希望帮助他们满足基本需求,因此偏向于那些他人,但正义原则要求我们在不干预我们的主观利益或情感的情况下考虑他们的需求,以便我们能够公正地行事。我认为,关怀的深层形式存在于这两种方法的背后,因此将它们联系在一起。在论证过程中,我拒绝了迈克尔·斯洛特的关怀伦理的情感主义形式,并阐述了托马斯·内格尔的道德理论,该理论似乎处于从道德情感到非个人客观性的一个范围的相反极端。然而,内格尔的规范现实主义理论为一个论点提供了意想不到的支持,即即使是我们最客观的道德理由的基础也存在着深刻而主观的关怀形式。