Grice e Lecaldano

 

In his ethics, Eugenio Lecaldano (notably in 

L’analitica del linguaggio morale and his works on the history of ethics) examines William Wollaston as a key figure in the rationalist tradition of the 18th century. 

The theories can be compared through the following points of tension and convergence:

• Truth-Claims vs. Sentiment: Wollaston’s central thesis is that moral wrongness consists in acting in a way that "denies a truth" (e.g., stealing is wrong because it treats an object as your own when it is not, thereby affirming a falsehood). Lecaldano, an expert on Humean sentimentalism, compares this to the "moral sense" tradition, highlighting how Wollaston attempts to reduce morality to a form of logic or intellectual error.
• Rationalism vs. Naturalism: While Wollaston is a rationalist who believes reason is the source of moral perception, Lecaldano views this as an untenable abstraction. Lecaldano often uses Wollaston to illustrate the limits of "intellectualist" ethics, contrasting it with his own preference for a naturalistic and sentimentalist framework where morality is rooted in human feelings and social construction rather than abstract propositional truths.
• The "Signification" of Action: Both theorists are interested in what an action means. Wollaston argues that actions signify propositions. Lecaldano, following the analytical tradition, also focuses on the meaning of moral language, but he shifts the focus from Wollaston’s "objective truth" to the emotional and social functions of moral utterances.
• Treatment of Human Nature: Wollaston argues that humans should be treated "as they really are" (rational beings susceptible to pain). Lecaldano critiques such "essentialist" views, arguing instead for a liberal and pluralistic ethics where morality is not derived from a fixed metaphysical nature but from the actual, diverse experiences and conscience of individuals.