This is a book about the continuing influence of Hume's ideas on moral and political philosophy. In part, it is a critical exegesis of Hume's most impressive and challenging doctrines in Book III of the Treatise of Human Nature on such topics as morals, motivation, justice, and social institutions. However, the main thrust of the argument is to throw into relief the importance of that discussion for contemporary philosophy. While the author subjects most contemporary defenses of Humean doctrines to intense criticism, he also seeks to discover what versions of Hume's theories might still be defensible and viable.

The Handbook of Moral Motivation offers a contemporary and comprehensive appraisal of the age-old question about motivation to do the good and to prevent the bad. From a research point of view, this question remains open even though we present here a rich collection of new ideas and data. Two sources helped the editors to frame the chapters: first they looked at an overwhelmingly fruitful research tradition on motivation in general (attribution theory, performance theory, self-determination theory, etc.) in relationship to morality. The second source refers to the tension between moral judgment (feelings, beliefs) and the real moral act in a twofold manner: (a) as a necessary duty, and, (b) as a social but not necessary bond. In addition, the handbook utilizes the latest research from a wide range of disciplinary perspectives, wishing to suggest by this that the answer to the posed question will likely not come from one discipline alone. Furthermore, our hope is that the implicit criticism that the narrowly constructed research approach of the recent past has contributed to closing off rather than opening up interdisciplinary lines of research becomes in this volume a strong counter discourse. The editors and authors of the handbook commend the research contained within in the hope that it will contribute to better understanding of humanity as an inherently moral species.

"Contemporary ethical thought owes a great deal to David Hume whose work has inspired non-cognitivists, naturalists and error-theorists and stimulated the rival theories of Kant and contemporary Kantians. This timely volume assembles an distinguished cast of international scholars to discuss three themes from Hume. First, Hume's infamous claim that 'Reason is, and ought only to be, the slave of the passions', which seems to suggest that reason can choose between means but not ends; second, the Motivation Argument which purports to prove that 'the rules of morality . . . are not conclusions of our reason'; and third, Hume's treatment of the virtues, which is now the focus of renewed philosophical interest. The contributors discuss these issues and other matters arising from the Humean agenda"--OCLC

Moral Motivation provides a history of moral motivation by ten eminent scholars, covering Plato, Aristotle, Spinoza, Locke, Hume, Kant, the consequentialists and others. It shows the complexity of the historical treatment of moral motivation and, moreover, how intertwined discussion of moral motivation is with central aspects of ethical theory.

This is a book about a particular moral theory – motivation ethics – and why we should accept it. But it is also a book about moral theorizing, about how we might compare different structures of moral theory. In principle we might morally evaluate a range of objects: we might, for example, evaluate what people do – is some action right, wrong, permitted, forbidden, a duty or beyond what is required? Or we might evaluate agents: what is it to be morally heroic, or morally depraved, or highly moral? And, we could evaluate institutions: which ones are just, or morally better, or legitimate? Most theories focus on one (or two) of these and offer arguments against rivals. What this book does is to step back and ask a different question: of the theories that evaluate one object, are they compatible with an acceptable account of the evaluation of the other objects? So, for instance, if a moral theory tells us which actions are right and wrong, well can it then be compatible with a theory of what it is to be a morally good or bad or heroic or depraved agent (or deny the need for this)? It seems that this would be an easy task, but the book sets out how this is very difficult for some of our most prominent theories, why this is so, and why a theory based on motivations might be the right answer.

Moral Motivation presents a history of the concept of moral motivation. The book consists of ten chapters by eminent scholars in the history of philosophy, covering Plato, Aristotle, later Peripatetic philosophy, medieval philosophy, Spinoza, Locke, Hume, Kant, Fichte and Hegel, and the consequentialist tradition. In addition, four interdisciplinary "Reflections" discuss how the topic of moral motivation arises in epic poetry, Cicero, early opera, and Theodore Dreiser. Most contemporary philosophical discussions of moral motivation focus on whether and how moral beliefs by themselves motivate an agent (at least to some degree) to act. In much of the history of the concept, especially before Hume, the focus is rather on how to motivate people to act morally as well as on what sort of motivation a person must act from (or what end an agents acts for) in order to be a genuinely ethical person or even to have done a genuinely ethical action. The book shows the complexity of the historical treatment of moral motivation and, moreover, how intertwined moral motivation is with central aspects of ethical theory.