Moral Philosophy or The Sociology of Morals? Response to Cansu Canca
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1971-8853/11477Keywords:
Trolley Problem, Moral Reasoning, Frames, Risk Assessment, RetroactionAbstract
I make three points in my response. I begin by pointing out the differences between the sociological and philosophical approaches to moral questions. The sociologist is interested in the trolley problem as a frame, and in the rhetorical power it generates. Second, I reject the claim that I am forcing the debate into a binary choice. Instead, I show the similarity between the model of moral reasoning Canca advocates and risk assessment, noting the well-known limitations of risk assessment. Finally, I reject the claim that I make moral arguments without engaging in principled moral reasoning, and instead explain the sociological method of comparison and relativization upon which I draw.References
Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.
Callon, M., Lascoumes, P., & Barthe, Y. (2009). Acting in an Uncertain World: an Essay on Technical Democracy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Canca, C. (2020). The Pandemic Doesn’t Run on Trolley Tracks: A Comment on Eyal’s Essay “Beware the Trolley Zealots”. Sociologica, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1971-8853/11412
Desrosiers, A. (2015). Retroaction: How indicators feed back onto quantified actors. In R. Rottenberg, S. E. Merry, S. J. Park, & J. Mugler (Eds.) The World of Indicators (pp. 329–353). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Douglas, M. (1990). How Institutions Think. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
Esposito, E. (2013). Economic circularities and second-order observation: The reality of ratings. Sociologica, 7(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.2383/74851
Eyal, G. (2019). The Crisis of Expertise. London: Polity.
Eyal, G. (2020). Beware of the Trolley Zealots. Sociologica, 14(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1971-8853/10842
Kamm, F. M. (2020). Moral reasoning in a pandemic. Boston Review, July 6. http://bostonreview.net/philosophy-religion/f-m-kamm-moral-reasoning-pandemic (Last accessed September 9, 2020).
Lakoff, A. (2015). Real time biopolitics: The actuary and the sentinel in global public health. Economy and Society, 44(1), 40–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2014.983833
Lavi, S. (2005). The Modern Art of Dying. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Lukes, S. (1973). Emile Durkheim: His Life and Work. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Stark, D. (2013). Observing finance as a network of observations. Sociologica, 7(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.2383/74854
Stark, D. (2020). Testing and being tested in a pandemic. Sociologica, 14(1), 67–94. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1971-8853/10931
Wynne, B. (1992). Uncertainty and environmental learning: Reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm. Global Environmental Change, 2(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-3780(92)90017-2
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Gil Eyal
The copyrights of all the texts on this journal belong to the respective authors without restrictions.
This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (full legal code).
See also our Open Access Policy.
