Not a Good Fix

Constitutivism on Value Change and Disagreement

Journal Article (2023)
Author(s)

Michael Klenk (TU Delft - Values Technology and Innovation, TU Delft - Ethics & Philosophy of Technology)

Ibo Poel (TU Delft - Values Technology and Innovation, TU Delft - Ethics & Philosophy of Technology)

Research Group
Ethics & Philosophy of Technology
Copyright
© 2023 M.B.O.T. Klenk, I.R. van de Poel
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-023-00742-y
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2023
Language
English
Copyright
© 2023 M.B.O.T. Klenk, I.R. van de Poel
Research Group
Ethics & Philosophy of Technology
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

We examine whether Thomsonian constitutivism, a metaethical view that analyses value in terms of ‘goodness-fixing kinds,’ i.e. kinds that themselves set the standards for being a good instance of the respective kind, offers a satisfactory explanation of value change and disagreement. While value disagreement has long been considered an important explanandum, we introduce value change as a closely related but distinct phenomenon of metaethical interest. We argue that constitutivism fails to explain both phenomena because of its commitment to goodness-fixing kinds. Constitutivism explains away disagreement and at best explains the emergence of new values, not genuine change. Therefore, Thomsonian constitutivism is not a good fix for realist problems with explaining value disagreement, and value change.