I have a few friends who are professional philosophers and who recognize the strength of arguments for vegetarianism, who say they don´t have counter arguments but still don't turn vegetarian. Is rational argument really persuasive? Or can't Mark Rowlands ever convince Roger Scruton that hunting is immoral? What is the authority of moral reasoning? Is there something one can do through reason to persuade the sensible knave?

Comments

I have friends who are convinced that one should always tell the truth and yet do not do so, and librarians are familiar with the phenomenon that books on ethics seem to disappear with greater frequency than on many other topics. It is one thing to be convinced by an argument, and quite another to make that fact of personal relevance to your life. This is not just a feature of morality, it occurs also in areas like sport, where we often know what we ought to do to score when taking a penality kick, for instance, but don't, for one reason or another. And that is the essence of the issue, other reasons intervene, such as our habits, who we are with, what image of ourselves we wish to project, and they overcome our reasoning on occasion. The world would be much more boring were this not to be the case, of course, since it is in the contrast here between what we want to do and what we know we ought to do that so much of the pleasure of being alive rests.

Read another response by Oliver Leaman

Read another response about Ethics, Rationality