Background
Thomas Michael Scanlon was born on June 28, 1940, in Indianapolis, Indiana, United States. He is a son of Thomas Michael, a lawyer, and Grace Louise Scanlon. He has a brother, Christopher.
Princeton University, Princeton. New Jersey, United States
In 1962 Thomas Michael Scanlon received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Princeton University.
Brasenose College, Oxford, England, United Kingdom
In 1963 Thomas Michael Scanlon studied at Brasenose College, Oxford.
Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
In 1968 Thomas Michael Scanlon obtained a Doctor of Philosophy degree from Harvard University.
Princeton University, Princeton. New Jersey, United States
In 1962 Thomas Michael Scanlon received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Princeton University.
Brasenose College, Oxford, England, United Kingdom
In 1963 Thomas Michael Scanlon studied at Brasenose College, Oxford.
Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
In 1968 Thomas Michael Scanlon obtained a Doctor of Philosophy degree from Harvard University.
(During its first two years of publication, Philosophy & P...)
During its first two years of publication, Philosophy & Public Affairs contributed to the public debate on abortion a set of remarkable and brilliant articles which examine the basic philosophical issues posed by this controversial subject: whether the fetus is a person, whether it has a right to life, whether a woman has a right to decide what happens in and to her body, whether there is an ethical connection between abortion and infanticide, whether there is any point after conception where it is possible to draw the line beyond which killing is impermissible. These five essays, together here for the first time in a single volume, offer radically differing points of view; they provide the best sustained discussion of these philosophical issues available anywhere.
https://www.amazon.com/Rights-Wrongs-Abortion-Philosophy-Affairs/dp/0691019797/?tag=2022091-20
1974
(This remarkably rich collection of articles focuses on mo...)
This remarkably rich collection of articles focuses on moral questions about war. The essays, originally published in Philosophy & Public Affairs, cover a wide range of topics from several points of view by writers from the fields of political science, philosophy, and law. The discussion of war and moral responsibility falls into three general categories: problems of political and military choice, problems about the relation of an individual to the actions of his government, and more abstract ethical questions as well. The first category includes questions about the ethical and legal aspects of war crimes and the laws of war; about the source of moral restrictions on military methods or goals; and about differences in the suitability of conduct which may depend on differences in the nature of the opponent. The second category includes questions about the conditions for the responsibility of individual soldiers and civilian officials for war crimes, and about the proper attitude of a government toward potential conscripts who reject its military policies.
https://www.amazon.com/War-Moral-Responsibility-Philosophy-Affairs/dp/0691071985/?tag=2022091-20
1974
(How do we judge whether an action is morally right or wro...)
How do we judge whether an action is morally right or wrong? If an action is wrong, what reason does that give us not to do it? Why should we give such reasons priority over our other concerns and values? In this book, T. M. Scanlon offers new answers to these questions, as they apply to the central part of morality that concerns what we owe to each other. According to his contractualist view, thinking about right and wrong is thinking about what we do in terms that could be justified to others and that they could not reasonably reject. He shows how the special authority of conclusions about right and wrong arises from the value of being related to others in this way, and he shows how familiar moral ideas such as fairness and responsibility can be understood through their role in this process of mutual justification and criticism. Scanlon bases his contractualism on a broader account of reasons, value, and individual well-being that challenges standard views about these crucial notions. He argues that desires do not provide us with reasons, that states of affairs are not the primary bearers of value, and that well-being is not as important for rational decision-making as it is commonly held to be. Scanlon is a pluralist about both moral and non-moral values. He argues that, taking this plurality of values into account, contractualism allows for most of the variability in moral requirements that relativists have claimed, while still accounting for the full force of our judgments of right and wrong.
https://www.amazon.com/What-We-Owe-Each-Other/dp/067400423X/?tag=2022091-20
1998
(Written between 1969 and 1999, these essays in political ...)
Written between 1969 and 1999, these essays in political philosophy examine the standards by which social and political institutions should be justified and appraised. The collection includes the classic essays "Preference and Urgency", "A Theory of Freedom of Expression", and "Contractualism and Utilitarianism", as well as other essays that have not been generally accessible until now. The volume will be essential reading for all studying these topics from the perspective of political philosophy, politics, and law.
https://www.amazon.com/Difficulty-Tolerance-Essays-Political-Philosophy/dp/0521533988/?tag=2022091-20
2003
(In a clear and elegant style, T. M. Scanlon reframes curr...)
In a clear and elegant style, T. M. Scanlon reframes current philosophical debates as he explores the moral permissibility of an action. Permissibility may seem to depend on the agent’s reasons for performing an action. For example, there seems to be an important moral difference between tactical bombing and a campaign by terrorists - even if the same number of non-combatants are killed - and this difference may seem to lie in the agents’ respective aims. However, Scanlon argues that the apparent dependence of permissibility on the agent’s reasons in such cases is merely a failure to distinguish between two kinds of moral assessment: assessment of the permissibility of an action and assessment of the way an agent decided what to do. Distinguishing between these two forms of assessment leads Scanlon to an important distinction between the permissibility of an action and its meaning: the significance for others of the agent’s willingness to act in this way. An action’s meaning depends on the agent’s reasons for performing it in a way that its permissibility does not. Blame, he argues, is a response to the meaning of an action rather than its permissibility. This analysis leads to a novel account of the conditions of moral responsibility and to important conclusions about the ethics of blame.
https://www.amazon.com/Moral-Dimensions-Permissibility-Meaning-Blame/dp/0674031784/?tag=2022091-20
2008
(T. M. Scanlon offers a qualified defense of normative cog...)
T. M. Scanlon offers a qualified defense of normative cognitivism - the view that there are irreducibly normative truths about reasons for action. He responds to three familiar objections: that such truths would have troubling metaphysical implications; that we would have no way of knowing what they are; and that the role of reasons in motivating and explaining action could not be explained if accepting a conclusion about reasons for action were a kind of belief. Scanlon answers the first of these objections within a general account of ontological commitment, applying to mathematics as well as normative judgments. He argues that the method of reflective equilibrium, properly understood, provides an adequate account of how we come to know both normative truths and mathematical truths and that the idea of a rational agent explains the link between an agent's normative beliefs and his or her actions. Whether every statement about reasons for action has a determinate truth value is a question to be answered by an overall account of reasons for action, in normative terms.
https://www.amazon.com/Being-Realistic-about-Reasons-Scanlon/dp/0198748108/?tag=2022091-20
2014
(T. M. Scanlon investigates why it matters to us. Demands ...)
T. M. Scanlon investigates why it matters to us. Demands for greater equality can seem puzzling, because it can be unclear what reason people have for objecting to the difference between what they have and what others have, as opposed simply to wanting to be better off. This book examines six such reasons. Inequality can be objectionable because it arises from a failure of some agent to give equal concern to the interests of different parties to whom it is obligated to provide some good. It can be objectionable because it involves or gives rise to objectionable inequalities in status. It can be objectionable because it gives the rich unacceptable forms of control over the lives of those who have less.
https://www.amazon.com/Inequality-Matter-Uehiro-Practical-Ethics-ebook/dp/B077VNFFR7/?tag=2022091-20
2018
Thomas Michael Scanlon was born on June 28, 1940, in Indianapolis, Indiana, United States. He is a son of Thomas Michael, a lawyer, and Grace Louise Scanlon. He has a brother, Christopher.
In 1962 Thomas Michael Scanlon received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Princeton University. In 1963 he studied at Brasenose College, Oxford. In 1968 Scanlon obtained a Doctor of Philosophy degree from Harvard University.
From 1966 to 1972 Thomas Michael Scanlon was an assistant professor of philosophy at Princeton University, an associate professor from 1972 to 1977, and a professor from 1977 to 1984. From 1979 to 1980 he was a visiting fellow at All Soul’s College, Oxford. In 1984 he was appointed the Alford Professor of Natural Religion, Moral Philosophy, and Civil Polity at Harvard University. In 2016 he retired from this position.
He is the author of What We Owe To Each Other, The Difficulty Of Tolerance: Essays In Political Philosophy, Moral Dimensions: Permissibility, Meaning, Blame, Being Realistic About Reasons, etc.
(During its first two years of publication, Philosophy & P...)
1974(How do we judge whether an action is morally right or wro...)
1998(Written between 1969 and 1999, these essays in political ...)
2003(This remarkably rich collection of articles focuses on mo...)
1974(In a clear and elegant style, T. M. Scanlon reframes curr...)
2008(T. M. Scanlon offers a qualified defense of normative cog...)
2014(T. M. Scanlon investigates why it matters to us. Demands ...)
2018Thomas Michael Scanlon is a member of the American Philosophical Society and the American Association of Political and Legal Philosophy.
On June 12, 1965, Thomas Michael Scanlon married Lucy Welliver. They have two children: Sarah and Jessica.
