Abstract
I respond to Noddings with further clarification of the notion of empathy and also argue that previous care ethics has put too much of an exclusive emphasis on relationships. I respond to Darwall by pointing out some implausible implications of his own and Kantian views about respect and by showing how a sentimentalist approach can avoid those difficulties. In my reply to Wren I indicate how a sentimentalist metaethics can be accurate to what we mean by ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ even if Kantians and others would emphatically deny what it says about these terms. And, finally, I argue that Fullinwider’s dismissive remarks on moral theories fail to reckon with what is significant and important about moral theorizing and also point out how a sentimentalist ethics and its view of moral education can, pace Fullinwider, be of some practical use to moral educators.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
