ABSTRACT
Is a universal ethic possible or desirable? Current philosophical debate over ‘universalism versus contextualism’—over abstract, impartial, absolute, universal perspectives versus concrete, local, historically specific, contextual perspectives–suggests radically different answers to this question. From the perspective of canonical Western philosophy, the answer is yes. Various competing consequentialist theories (e.g. Ethical Egoism and Utilitarianism) and deontological theories (e.g. Divine Command Theory, Kantianism, Rights-Based theories, perhaps Virtue Ethics) have been offered to fill this role. From the perspective of some feminisms, as well as what has come to be called postmodernism, the answer seems to be no. Various alternative theories (e.g. a feminist ‘ethic of care’, radical deconstructionist positions) have been proposed. Navigating these waters is no easy task, especially if one finds oneself, as I do, wanting to defend some version of both universalism and contextualism.
