Normative uncertainty

Abstract

This thesis addresses the question of how to make decisions when we are uncertain about what we ought to do, a pervasive issue in human life. The author argues that metanormativism, the view that second-order norms govern action relative to uncertainty about first-order normative claims, provides a framework for addressing this challenge. Drawing an analogy with empirical uncertainty, the author proposes that decision-makers should maximize expected choice-worthiness, considering normative uncertainty in a similar way. The thesis defends this view against criticisms related to ordinal theories and intertheoretic comparisons. Finally, it explores the implications of metanormativism for rational action, the causal/evidential debate in decision theory, and the value of moral philosophical research.