In defence of panmoralism

Full text not archived in this repository.

Please see our End User Agreement.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Add to AnyAdd to TwitterAdd to FacebookAdd to LinkedinAdd to PinterestAdd to Email

Oderberg, D. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9585-0515 (2026) In defence of panmoralism. Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy. ISSN 1502-3923 doi: 10.1080/0020174X.2026.2692068 (In Press)

Abstract/Summary

Panmoralism is the thesis that every reason for human action is a moral reason. The thesis is easily misunderstood. It does not say that every cause of behaviour is a moral reason, or that every fact relevant to the explanation of an event is morally significant. It concerns reasons in the practical sense: considerations under which free and rational agents act, may act, or may be justified in acting. I argue that once reasons for action are understood in this way, and once morality is understood as the rational ordering of human action to the human good, the standard distinction between moral and non-moral reasons becomes artificial. Reasons of prudence, taste, etiquette, permissibility, supererogation, and even explanatory reasons – where these genuinely explain action – are not rivals to moral reasons but species or varieties of them. The contrary view depends partly on an unduly narrow conception of morality as centred on obligation, and partly on a failure to distinguish reasons from causes, background conditions, and merely enabling facts.

Altmetric Badge

Dimensions Badge

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-pure-test.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/130034
Identification Number/DOI 10.1080/0020174X.2026.2692068
Refereed Yes
Divisions Arts, Humanities and Social Science > School of Humanities > Philosophy
Central Services
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record