E-LOGOS 2022, 29(1):4-18 | DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.489

'tis but a Scratch: on the Moral Neutrality of Tattoos

Michael Campbell
Department of Ethics, Kyoto University, Japan.

In a recent article, Matej Cíbik claims that some tattoos are immoral because they are imprudent. (Cíbik 2020) In response, I argue that a tattoo can only be immoral if it causes harm to a third party, so that no tattoo is immoral simply because it is reckless. Conflating prudential and moral requirements in the way that Cíbik does would strike at the heart of liberalism, and has deeply counter-intuitive consequences, as we can see when we consider Cíbik's own discussions of suicidal individuals and smokers. After discussing the role of the self/other distinction in liberal moral philosophy, I affirm both the moral neutrality of tattoos and the importance of adopting non-judgemental attitudes towards the choices which a person makes concerning her own body.

Keywords: Tattoos, prudence, morality, liberalism, regret

Received: December 21, 2021; Revised: December 21, 2021; Accepted: June 6, 2022; Prepublished online: June 6, 2022; Published: September 1, 2022  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Campbell, M. (2022). 'tis but a Scratch: on the Moral Neutrality of Tattoos. E-LOGOS29(1), 4-18. doi: 10.18267/j.e-logos.489
Download citation

References

  1. Arp, R. 2012 Ed. Tattoos - Philosophy for Everyone: I Ink, Therefore I am. Wiley-Blackwell. Go to original source...
  2. Cíbik, M. 2018. Expectations and Obligations. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21: 1079-1090. Go to original source...
  3. Cíbik, M. 2020. On the Immorality of Tattoos. Journal of Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-019-09319-w Go to original source...
  4. Crisp, R. (ed.) 2005. Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
  5. Foot, P. 1978/2002. Virtues and Vices and Other Essays in Moral Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Go to original source...
  6. Gaita, R. 1991/2004. Good and Evil: An Absolute Conception. London: St. Martin's Press. Go to original source...
  7. Hume, D. 1783/2005. Of Suicide. New York: Penguin.
  8. McMahan, J. 2002. The Ethics of Killing: Problems at the Margins of Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Go to original source...
  9. Mill, J.S. 1859/2003. On liberty. In Utilitarianism and on Liberty: Including 'Essay on Bentham' and Selections from the Writings of Jeremy Bentham and John Austin, ed M. Warnock London: Wiley-Blackwell. Go to original source...
  10. Miller, F.G. and A. Wertheimer 2003. Eds The Ethics of Consent. New York: Oxford University Press.
  11. Parfit, D. 1984. Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  12. Shah, N., & Velleman, J. D. (2005). Doxastic Deliberation. The Philosophical Review, 114(4), 497-534. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30043693 Go to original source...
  13. Velleman, J.D. 1999. A Right to Self-Termination? Ethics 109: 606 - 628. Go to original source...
  14. Williams, B. 1981. Moral Luck. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Go to original source...
  15. Williams, B. 1985/2006. Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. Oxford: Routledge. Go to original source...

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.