We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
What the doctor should do: perspectivist duties for objectivists about ought.
- Authors
Fassio, Davide
- Abstract
Objectivism is the view that how an agent ought to act depends on all kinds of facts, regardless of the agent's epistemic position with respect to them. One of the most important challenges to this view is constituted by certain cases involving specific conditions of uncertainty—so-called three-options cases. In these cases it seems overwhelmingly plausible that an agent ought to do what is recommendable given her limited perspective, even though the agent knows that this is not objectively the best course of action. The standard objectivist response to this challenge relies on a distinction between what one ought to do and what would be blameworthy or unreasonable to do. This response is affected by several problems. In this paper I introduce and defend an alternative objectivist response to the challenge. My proposal admits that in the relevant cases the agent ought to do what is recommendable given her perspective, but maintains that this diagnosis of the cases is fully compatible with objectivism. I argue that this proposal has several advantages over alternative accounts of the cases.
- Subjects
OBJECTIVISM (Philosophy); UNCERTAINTY; PATIENTS; PHYSICIANS; PROFESSIONALISM
- Publication
Philosophical Studies, 2022, Vol 179, Issue 5, p1523
- ISSN
0031-8116
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1007/s11098-021-01717-x