The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
REASON AND MORALITY
Abstract
Most modern philosophers attempt to solve the problem of morality from within the epistemological assumptions that define the dominant cultural perspective of our age. Alan Gewirth's Reason and Morality is a major work in this ongoing enterprise. Gewirth develops, with patience and skill, what he calls a 'modified naturalism' in which morality is derived by logic alone from the concept of action. . . . I think that the publication of Reason and Morality is a major event in the history of moral philosophy. It develops with great power a new and exciting position in ethical naturalism. No one, regardless of philosophical stance, can read this work without an enlargement of mind. It illuminates morality and agency for all.-E. M. Adams, The Review of Metaphysics This is a fascinating study of an apparently intractable problem. Gewirth has provided plenty of material for further discussion, and his theory deserves serious consideration. He is always aware of possible rejoinders and argues in a rigorous manner, showing a firm grasp of the current state of moral and political philosophy.-Mind
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Theory of Justice: Original Edition
Rawls, J. (1971) · doi:10.4159/9780674042605 · Cited by 9,496
The foreign policy decision-maker simulation
Nozicka, G. J., Bonham, G. M., & Shapiro, M. J. (1974) · Proceedings of the 1974 annual conference on XX - ACM '74 · doi:10.1145/1408800.1408831 · Cited by 620
Cited by
Friedman, B. (1996) · Interactions · doi:10.1145/242485.242493 · Cited by 966
Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems
Friedman, B., Kahn, P. H., Borning, A., & Huldtgren, A. (2013) · Philosophy of Engineering and Technology · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-7844-3_4 · Cited by 678
Agency, Shmagency: Why Normativity Won't Come from What Is Constitutive of Action
Enoch, D. (2006) · Philosophical Review · doi:10.1215/00318108-115-2-169 · Cited by 521
An Anthropological Critique of Development: The Growth of Ignorance
(2002) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203410219 · Cited by 477
Harm, Affect, and the Moral/Conventional Distinction
KELLY, D., STICH, S., HALEY, K. J., ENG, S. J., & FESSLER, D. M. T. (2007) · Mind & Language · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0017.2007.00302.x · Cited by 305
Metadata
- Authors
- Gewirth, A.
- Venue
- Religious Studies Review
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1979-07
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 187-190
- ISSN
- 0319-485X (ISSN-L)
- 1748-0922
- OpenAlex
- W2128647230
- Cited by
- 599
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 47.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: REASON AND MORALITY. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1748-0922.1979.tb00214.x
- The paper
- Gewirth, A. (1979). REASON AND MORALITY. Religious Studies Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0922.1979.tb00214.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
