MORAL PARTICULARISM

Popularized by Jonathan Dancy in the early 21st century, moral particularism says that there is not a single fixed moral rule that can apply to every situation. This philosophy is centered around the context of a situation and how said context can affect what moral standards and norms are best for that situation. Dancy’s advocacy of a more fluid moral system contrasts with the more rigid ones, such as Kantianism and utilitarianism.

Let’s jump into the core idea of moral particularism. As said earlier, Dancy believed that moral rules couldn’t be applied in a fixed way like we do with math formulas. Let’s put this into a real-life scenario to make it easier to understand. In scenario A, you saw someone kill a person in cold blood with no justification, so the moral thing to do when the police officer shows up to your door is to tell them the truth about what you saw and who did it. However, in scenario B, someone runs into your home and tells them that someone is trying to murder them. You hide the victim and the murderer knocks on your door and asks if the victim is in your house; here, many would say the moral thing to do is to lie so that you can save a human life. In this example, you can see that the moral thing to do in Scenario A was to tell the truth, but in Scenario B it was the total opposite. Thus, Dancy argues through moral particularism that rules are ever changing based on the particular details of a situation.

Now, let’s transition to some key features of moral particularism. Firstly, and most obviously, there are no universal moral principles; however, this belief goes to extremes. Dancy even believes that the idea that “all killing is bad” isn’t completely valid. The second idea is context sensitivity: the idea that moral weight shifts depending on surrounding details. The third idea is the holism of reasons, which argues that the motive of an action can change when we take into account other factors. Dancy also rejects the idea that we need a moral system, as he believes that the system is too “fixed”.

Some common philosophies that argue against particularism are Kantianism and utilitarianism. Kantianism and utilitarianism both use rigid moral rules, which go against the flexibility that Dancy believes in. There are also other common concept-based arguments. For example, people believe that just saying that moral rules are flexible isn’t enough; many believe that there is too much confusion and that it is difficult to discern what moral rules apply in some situations. Many also argue that it’s impossible to teach a form of morality that doesn’t have any rules. Others also believe that relying on what humans believe is right can lead to inconsistent decisions, a lack of stability, bias, and individuals rationalizing bad behavior.