 previous article in this issue | next article in this issue  |
Preview first page |
Document Details : Title: Bracketing Who is Right Subtitle: A Lesson from the Ethics of Compromise, Toleration, and War Author(s): WENDT, Fabian Journal: Ethical Perspectives Volume: 32 Issue: 1 Date: 2025 Pages: 57-70 DOI: 10.2143/EP.32.1.3294143 Abstract : The paper argues that the ethics of compromise, toleration, and war sometimes have to bracket who is right in the underlying conflict. It starts by highlighting a parallel between the ethics of compromise, toleration, and war: All three sometimes seem to apply symmetrically to those who are right and those who are wrong. It then discusses three attempts to make sense of this without bracketing who is right: one employs the idea of secondary oughts, a second appeals to conventions that are justifiably articulated in neutral terms, a third interprets the relevant oughts as subjective. The paper tries to show that none of them succeeds, and it concludes that we should embrace the view that the ethics of compromise, toleration, and war sometimes have to bracket who is right. The deeper rationale for this view, it suggests, is that sometimes all parties to a conflict must count as legitimate. |
|
