Rob Lawlor

University of Leeds, IDEA Inter-Disciplinary Ethics Applied, Faculty Member

Followers

Following

Public Views

I work mainly on moral philosophy and applied ethics. My book "Shades of Goodness: Gradability, Demandingness and the Structure of Moral Theories" argues that people under-estimate the significance of gradability in ethics, particularly in non-consequentialism, and that structurally speaking, non-consequentialism has more in common with consequentialism than most people appreciate. Since publishing the book, however, most of my work has focused on applied ethics.

less

Andrej Dujella

University of Zagreb

Hemin Koyi

Uppsala University

Jana Javornik

University of East London

Graham Martin

University of Leicester

Gwen Robbins Schug

University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Gabriel Gutierrez-Alonso

University of Salamanca

John Sutton

Macquarie University

Eros Carvalho

Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul

Kevin Arbuckle

Swansea University

Jesper Hoffmeyer

University of Copenhagen

Uploads

Videos by Rob Lawlor

05:52

Automated Vehicles and Corporate Homicide

This is the last part of a longer video: "Automated Vehicles, Ethics, Law and Professional Practi... more

Papers by Rob Lawlor

Alternatives to the Threshold Account

Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks, 2009

Typically, it is thought that act-consequentialists are faced with a dilemma. Either, they state ... more Typically, it is thought that act-consequentialists are faced with a dilemma. Either, they state that only the best act available is permissible, in which case consequentialism is said to be too demanding, or they state that a non-optimising act can be permissible, if it is good enough, in which case it is claimed that they will have difficulties justifying any particular cut-off.1 Then there is also an additional worry that, having failed to justify a cut-off, we could be left with a theory that doesn’t demand anything at all.2 This problem arises because of the gradable nature of consequentialism.

The role of moral theories in the teaching of applied ethics

It is argued, in this paper, that moral theories should not be discussed extensively when teachin... more It is argued, in this paper, that moral theories should not be discussed extensively when teaching applied ethics. First, it is argued that, students are either presented with a large amount of information regarding the various subtle distinctions and the nuances of the theory and, as a result, the students simply fail to take it in or, alternatively, the students are presented with a simplified caricature of the theory, in which case the students may understand the information they are given, but what they have understood is of little or no value because it is merely a caricature of a theory. Second, there is a methodological problem with appealing to moral theories to solve particular issues in applied ethics. An analogy with science is appealed to. In physics there is a hope that we could discover a unified theory of everything. But this is, of course, a hugely ambitious project, and much harder than, for example, finding a theory of motion. If the physicist wants to understand motion, he should try to do so directly. We would think he was particularly misguided if he thought that, to answer this question, he first needed to construct a unified theory of everything.

The Rejection of Scalar Consequentialism

Utilitas, Mar 1, 2009

In ‘The Scalar Approach to Utilitarianism’ Alastair Norcross argues that scalar consequentialism ... more In ‘The Scalar Approach to Utilitarianism’ Alastair Norcross argues that scalar consequentialism is the most plausible form of consequentialism, but his arguments are flawed: he is simply mistaken when he suggests that there is a problem with deriving absolutes like right and wrong from gradable properties such as goodness; he cannot justify his claim that the choice of a threshold will always be arbitrary; and his ‘no significant difference’ argument only shows that the consequentialist doesn&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;#39;tcareabout permissibility. Furthermore, I argue that, although Norcross was right to claim that a scalar theory can be action-guiding (to an extent), he was mistaken to think that ‘Abolishing the notion of “ought” will not seriously undermine the action-guiding nature of morality.’ If anything can be said in favour of scalar consequentialism, it is only that it is the mosthonestform of consequentialism, because it doesn&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;#39;t pretend to care about permissibility.

Belt whippings in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu: a case study exploring conditional consent and the value of options

Acta Universitatis Carolinae. Kinanthropologica, Nov 26, 2015

In this paper, considering the practice of whipping students with belts, when grading, I argue th... more In this paper, considering the practice of whipping students with belts, when grading, I argue that the most obvious objections, considering the harm involved or questioning the validity of the consent, are inconclusive. However, I argue that, even if we assume the consent is valid, the practice can still be shown to be problematic. This argument relies on the idea of conditional consent.

Rob Lawlor

Uploads

Videos by Rob Lawlor

Papers by Rob Lawlor

Log In