Reevaluating R.M. Hare's Moral Philosophy through a Mediterranean Archaeological and Archaeometric Lens

Abstract

This study critically reexamines and reevaluates R.M. Hare's analysis of ethical thinking through a multidisciplinary approach, particularly leveraging the intersection of archaeology and natural sciences. Hare's seminal distinction between prescriptive and descriptive language in moral discourse has profoundly influenced ethical theory and argumentation for decades. This reevaluation retains the essence of Hare's strategy but narrows its scope, refraining from independently justifying utilitarian conclusions. Instead, it focuses on placing critical constraints on ethical decisions, illuminating the complexities of moral cognition and language. Furthermore, we demonstrate how this constrained argument can serve as a crucial element within a broader framework that ultimately generates utilitarian arguments. This research aims to contribute to ongoing discussions in moral theory, cognitive psychology, and ethics, offering a more comprehensive and nuanced perspective on the intricacies of moral thought and language within the context of Mediterranean archaeology and archaeometry.