Area	appropriativity

	pragmatic ethics gary e. davis	January 26, 2019

“Ethical” theory is a tradition of action-orienting value conceptuality (I would proffer) that is better understood relative to a 3-fold bi-modal pragmatics (rather than traditionally), because the basis of 3(2) pragmatics (in empirically grounded generative psychology and humanistic conceptual prospecting) provides a more-flexible and adaptive approach to “ethical” issues than seeking something sui generis, like a natural kind that invites an analytical centripetality of the “Ethical.” Nonetheless, inquiring into what inquirers want from ethical theory is very useful, because important issues have been regarded as especially “ethical.” But I would argue that all of those issues are more fruitfully examined in terms of interests and appeals of differential identity, appropriativity, value, validity, virtue, and practicality (and correlate dilemmas) transposed into 3(2)-pragmatic thinking (developed beyond my sketch of appropriativity (“a bi-modal appropriativity in a three-fold pragmatic”) so far, of course). That’s an eccentric claim, but further pursuit of this now would be beyond the broadbrush intentions of this discussion. For example, my examination some years ago of Habermas’s dispute with Putnam was convoluted because that’s the way I enjoy working (which I shared). That could be usefully “unpacked” (as philosphical analysts say), but would take much time (which I’d love to do someday).

next—> virtue consequentiality

 

 

 

 

 

Be fair. © 2019, gary e. davis