Ethics, law, and the social sciences: Reflections on Robin, King, and Reidenbach

Robin, King, and Reidenbach (RK&R) 1) contend that empirical research is on a different plateau than philosophical research and 2) assume that the categories used in the questionnaire to determine attorneys' moral beliefs are adequate. First, RK&R must be located in the grand scheme of ethics. There are three phases in ethics: explanatory, descriptive and evaluative. The RK&R work self-consciously eschews the evaluative process and stays in the explanatory and descriptive phases. Second, the categories (items) included in the scale that are said to indicate the moral beliefs that comprise the decision making process eliminate consequentialist considerations and thus are seriously flawed. Those engaged in empirical research must remember that any research needs explanatory hypotheses, which should be aided by a thoroughgoing analysis of the meaning of the categories being used. The analysis of categories is not an empirical task, but a pre-empirical philosophic task. Any discussion of method is not empirical, but philosophical speculation about what will be admitted as empirical.