W.D. Ross's intuitionist framework establishes that people possess irreducible prima facie duties—like promise-keeping and justice—that bind agents independently of any contribution to happiness.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1.Moral intuitions about duties (promise-keeping, honesty) feel binding even when breaking them increases overall happiness.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Reducing all morality to happiness consequences fails to explain why we owe special duties to those we've made commitments to.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.Prima facie duties provide a framework that respects moral pluralism without collapsing into single-principle utilitarianism.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reasons Against

1 perspective

Reason against

1.Appeals to 'intuition' lack empirical justification and vary across cultures, suggesting psychology rather than objective truth.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Prima facie duties conflict with no principled resolution method, making the framework practically indeterminate in real moral dilemmas.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.Duties' independence from consequences seems arbitrary—why should promise-keeping bind us if it causes serious harm?
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Next step

Based on where you are in your exploration

Strongest counterpoint

Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

Key Terms

Bind agents(describing how duties affect us morally): To create obligations or requirements that people must follow or take seriously.
Independently of happiness(contrasting Ross's view with utilitarian ethics): Without needing to justify the duty by showing it makes people happy—the duty matters on its own.
Intuitionist framework(the philosophical approach Ross uses): A moral theory that says we can directly know or sense what's right and wrong through intuition, rather than calculating consequences or following strict rules.
Justice(Utilitarian account of justice; contrasted with non-utility-based theories): A name for certain classes of moral rules which concern the essentials of human well-being more nearly than other rules for the guidance of life, carrying more absolute obligation.
Promise-keeping(an example of a prima facie duty): The moral obligation to do what you've said you'll do.
W.D. Ross(the philosopher whose framework is being discussed): A British philosopher (1877-1971) who argued that morality isn't based on one simple principle, but on several independent duties that sometimes conflict and require our judgment to balance.
irreducible(Personalist anthropology; distinguishes personhood from mere biological individuality): That which is unique and unrepeatable in each human being, by virtue of which a person is not merely an individual of a species but a personal subject.
prima facie duties(W.D. Ross's moral framework): Obligations that hold unless overridden by other conflicting obligations in particular circumstances

Connections

1 topic

Consequentialism1 linked

Appeals to 'intuition' lack empirical justification and vary across cultures, su...Duties' independence from consequences seems arbitrary—why should promise-keepin...Moral intuitions about duties (promise-keeping, honesty) feel binding even when ...Prima facie duties conflict with no principled resolution method, making the fra...

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 2 (1 for, 1 against)
Edits: 1 edit