8/10/2019 Singer Moral Experts

1/4

Moral ExpertsAuthor(s): Peter SingerSource: Analysis, Vol. 32, No. 4 (Mar., 1972), pp. 115-117Published by: Oxford University Presson behalf of The Analysis CommitteeStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3327906.

Accessed: 02/01/2015 13:51

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Oxford University Pressand The Analysis Committeeare collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and

extend access toAnalysis.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 66.11.2.165 on Fri, 2 Jan 201513:51:16 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ouphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=anacomhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3327906?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3327906?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=anacomhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup

8/10/2019 Singer Moral Experts

2/4

8/10/2019 Singer Moral Experts

3/4

116

ANALYSIS

and

wrong

involves

caring

about

it,

so

that

it is

not,

in

fact,

really

a

case

of

knowing.

One

cannot,

for

instance,

forget

the

differencebetween

right and wrong. One can only cease to care about it. Therefore,

according

to

Ryle,

the honest man is not

'even

a

bit of

an

expert

at

anything'

p.

157).

It

is

significant

hat

Ryle

says

that

'the honest

man'

is

not

an

expert,

and later

he

says

the same

of

'the charitableman'.

His

conclusionwould

have

had less

initial

plausibility

f

he had

said

'the

morally

good

man'.

Being

honest

and

being

charitable

are

often-though

perhaps

not as

often

as

Ryle

seems

to

think-comparatively

simple

matters,

which we

all can

do,

if we care about

them. It

is

when,

say,

honesty

clashes

with

charity(If a wealthyman overpaysme, should I tell him, or give the

money

to famine

relief?)

that there is

need for

thought

and

argument.

The

morally good

man must

know how to resolve these conflicts of

values.

Caring

about

doing

what is

right

is,

of

course, essential,

but it

is not

enough,

as

the numeroushistorical

examples

of

well-meaning

but

misguided

men

indicate.

Only

if

the

moral code

of one's

society

were

perfect

and

undisputed,

both

in

general

principles

and in their

application

to

particular

cases,

would

there be

no

need

for the

morally

good

man

to be a

thinking

man.

Then

he could

just

live

by

the

code,

unreflectively.

If,

however,

there is

reason

to believe that one's

society

does not have

perfect

norms,

or if

there

are no

agreed

norms

on

a whole

range

of

issues,

the

morallygood

man must

try

to think

out for

himself

the

question

of

what he

ought

to

do. This

'thinking

out' is

a

difficult ask.

It

requires,

irst,

information.

I

may,

for

instance,

be

wondering

whether it is

right

to eat

meat.

I

would have

a

better

chance of

reaching

he

right

decision,

or at

least,

a

soundly

based

decision,

if

I

knew

a

number

of facts

about the

capacities

of

animals or

suffering,

and

about the

methods

of

rearing

and

slaughter-

ing

animals

now

being

used.

I

might

also

want to

know about the

effect

of a vegetariandiet on humanhealth, and, consideringthe world food

shortage,

whether

more

or

less

food would

be

produced

by giving up

meat

production.

Once

I

have

got

evidence

on

these

questions,

I

must

assess

it

and

bring

it

together

with

whatever

moral

views

I

hold.

Depending

on

what

method of moral

reasoning

I

use,

this

may

involve

a

calculation

of which

course

of action

produces greaterhappiness

and

less

suffering;

or

it

may

mean

an

attempt

o

place

myself

in

the

positions

of

those

affected

by my

decision;

or

it

may

lead me to

attempt

o

weigh

up

conflicting

duties

and interests. Whatever

method

I

employ,

I

must

be awareof the possibilitythatmy own desireto eat meatmay lead to

bias

in

my

deliberations.

None

of

this

procedure

s

easy-neither

the

gathering

of

information,

nor the

selection

of what information

is

relevant,

nor its

combination

with

a

basic

moral

position,

nor

the elimination

of bias.

Someone

This content downloaded from 66.11.2.165 on Fri, 2 Jan 201513:51:16 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

8/10/2019 Singer Moral Experts

4/4