Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T23:36:13.843Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Philosophical Advice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2021

David Archard
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Philosophers who publish articles that make practical ethical recommendations are thereby offering advice. I consider what obligations they incur in advising. I analyse the giving of advice as a communicative act whose defining and characteristic aim is to secure acceptance of what is advised. Such advice need not be solicited or taken up. I distinguish advice from incitement and threats and specify the scope of the adviser's responsibility for others acting upon the advice. I explore how advice can be bad in how it is given and what is given. I consider, and criticise, various pleas for exemption from the responsibilities of philosophical advising: that advice was not meant; that it wouldn't make any difference anyway; and that the writing was not for those who might act on it. I examine the offering of philosophical advice to policy makers, comparing the views on this of Mary Warnock and Dan Brock. I conclude by asking practical normative philosophers to consider what they should do inasmuch as they are advising.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy , Volume 96 , Issue 4 , October 2021 , pp. 603 - 623
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy, 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Archard, David, ‘Moral Compromise,’ Philosophy, 87 (2012), 403–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, J. L., How to Do Things with Words, Urmson, J. O. & Shisà, M., eds (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brazier, Margot, ‘Regulating the reproduction business?’ Medical Law Review, 7 (1999), 166–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brock, Dan, ‘Truth or Consequences,’ Ethics, 97 (1987), 786–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, Marie, ‘Pre-persons, commodities or cyborgs: the legal construction and representation of the embryo,’ Health Care Analysis, 8 (2000), 171–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giublini, Alberto and Minerva, Francesca, ‘After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?’ Journal of Medical Ethics, 39 (2013), 261–63; published online February 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giublini, Alberto and Minerva, Francesca, ‘An open letter from Giublini and Minerva,’ Journal of Medical Ethics, 2012 https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2012/03/02/an-open-letter-from-giubilini-and-minerva/Google Scholar
Hare, Richard, ‘In vitro fertilization and the Warnock report’, in his Essays on bioethics (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993).Google Scholar
Hart, H L A and Honoré, Tony, Causation in the Law, 2nd edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan [1651] Edited with an Introduction by Macpherson, C.B. (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1968).Google Scholar
Jubba, Robert and Kurtlumus, A Faik, ‘No Country for Honest Men: Political Philosophers and Real Politics,’ Political Studies, 60 (2012), 539–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knowles, Elizabeth, What they didn't say: a dictionary of misquotations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).Google Scholar
Lockwood, Michael, ‘The Warnock report: A philosophical appraisal’, in Lockwood, M. (ed.) Moral dilemmas in modern medicine (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), 155–86.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S., On Liberty (1859) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/34901Google Scholar
Nagel, Thomas, ‘Moral Conflict and Political Legitimacy,’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, 16 (1987), 215–40.Google Scholar
Rawls, John Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996).Google Scholar
Scanlon, Thomas, ‘A Theory of Freedom of Expression,’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972), 204–226.Google Scholar
Searle, John, ‘A taxonomy of illocutionary acts,’ in Gunderson, K. (ed.) Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 9: Language, Mind and Knowledge (Minneapolis, 1975), 344–69.Google Scholar
Stemplowska, Zofia and Swift, Adam, ‘Ideal and Nonideal Theory,’ in Estlund, David (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Political Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).Google Scholar
Thompson, Dennis F., Political Ethics and Public Office (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990).Google Scholar
Thomson, Judith Jarvis, Goodness and Advice (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000).Google Scholar
Warnock, Mary, Nature and Mortality: Recollections of a philosopher in public life (London: Continuum, 2003).Google Scholar