Ethical generalism is the view that the rationality of moral thought and judgement depends on a suitable provision of moral principles.
Particularism, therefore, denies the rationality of moral thought.
The strongest defensible version, perhaps, holds that though there may be some moral principles, still the rationality of moral thought and judgement in no way depends on a suitable provision of such things; and the perfectly moral judge would need far more than a grasp on an appropriate range of principles and the ability to apply them.
The twentieth-century crisis of Enlightenment rationality opens the way for the rediscovery of an earlier, alternate rationality and mode of thought (Baroque reason) that had been repressed and vilified as an aberration beginning in the eighteenth century and continuing through the nineteenth.
These defenses include hyper-rationality, the isolation of thought and feeling, reactive behavior in turning anger into moral righteousness, and passive control of other people as well as their own thought processes.
He then presents an alternative theory of the role of rationality in thought and action.
In the 1960s, Michel Foucault posed an "archeology" of ruptured and irregular temporal strata as an alternative to tracing progressive and increasingly complex rationality and abstraction in the history of thought.
Foucault's governmentality framework explores the connections between "forms of government and rationalities or modes of thoughts (about governing) which justify, legitimise and make the exercise of government deem rational" (Fimyar 2008, p. 4).
But Vogler's anti-psychologism insists that questions about rationality are not questions about what processes of thought lead up to a decision.
The 'linguistic turn', as it is known, was adopted as a philosophical tool in order to explicate the rationality and the objectivity that is, inter-subjectivity and communinter-subjectivity and
