Cited by 62Philosophical Ethics and TheoryEthics in Business and EducationPolitical Philosophy and Ethics

Computer Ethics and Moral Methodology

Van Den Hoven, Jeroen·1997·Metaphilosophy

Abstract

In computer ethics, as in other branches of applied ethics, the problem of the justification of moral judgment is still unresolved. I argue that the method which is referred to as “The Method of Wide Reflective Equilibrium” (WRE) offers the best solution to it. It does not fall victim to the false dilemma of having to choose either case‐based particularist or principle‐based universalist approaches to the problem of moral justification. I claim that WRE also provides the best model of practical moral reasoning available for computer ethics. It does not pretend to provide quasi‐algorithmic procedures for moral decision‐making, but neither does it abandon the regulative ideal of communicative transparency in discursive public justification.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1467-9973.00053

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • 'Fairness', 'dignity', and other such abstract concepts are examples of 'essentially contested concepts' which have many possible conflicting meanings requiring contextual interpretation through one's background political and philosophical beliefs.

    “'Fairness', 'dignity', and other such abstract concepts are examples of 'essentially contested concepts' which have many possible conflicting meanings requiring contextual interpretation through one's background political and philosophical beliefs.”

    From Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI (2019) · cites this paper as [46]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Van Den Hoven, J.
Venue
Metaphilosophy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1997-07
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
234-248
ISSN
  • 0026-1068 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9973
OpenAlex
W2099919863
Cited by
62
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
13.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Metaphilosophy (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophical Ethics and Theory
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
Keywords
computer ethics, moral justification, wide reflective equilibrium, particularism, universalism, public justification, moral methodology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review