Caring, objectivity and justice: an integrative view.

Area of Science:

• Moral philosophy
• Ethics
• Normative realism

Background:

• The article addresses the tension between the principle of humanity (requiring partial care for others' vital needs) and the principle of justice (demanding impartial consideration of needs).
• It critiques Michael Slote's sentimentalist ethics of care, positioning it against Thomas Nagel's moral theory.

Purpose of the Study:

• To argue that a deep form of caring underlies both the principles of humanity and justice, thus unifying them.
• To demonstrate how Thomas Nagel's theory of normative realism supports the idea that objective moral reasons stem from subjective caring.

Main Methods:

• Philosophical argumentation and conceptual analysis.
• Examination and critique of existing ethical theories, specifically Slote's and Nagel's.
• Reinterpretation of Nagel's moral theory to support the central thesis.

Main Results:

• A unified understanding of humanity and justice is achieved through the concept of deep caring.
• Slote's sentimentalist ethics of care is found to be insufficient.
• Nagel's normative realism unexpectedly validates the foundational role of subjective caring in objective morality.

Conclusions:

• Deep caring serves as the fundamental basis for both partiality (humanity) and impartiality (justice).
• Objective moral reasoning is not devoid of subjective emotional underpinnings, as evidenced by Nagel's work.
• The study reconciles the apparent dichotomy between emotional care and rational moral principles.