3 Comments
⭠ Return to thread

Tangential: I'm curious whether Scanlon has ever answered the immediately salient question of how he might explain what "could reasonably reject" means? Is the idea that the answer to what that means will appeal to moral ideas like rights, fairness, justice, oppression, desert, etc., and that the apparently blatant circularity is not a problem because he's a "coherentist" and he believes "thick" moral concepts or something?

Expand full comment