El artículo analiza la cuestión del fanático moral desde la perspectiva del prescriptivismo universal. (I) Se discute la tesis de la prescriptividad y la universalizabilidad y el vínculo entre el prescriptivismo universal y el utilitarismo. (II) Se discuten el problema del fanático moral y el contraargumento desarrollado por Hare en el libro _Freedom and Reason_. (III) Discuto el contraargumento desarrollado por Hare en _Moral Thinking._ (IV) Discuto los límites del argumento del fanático. (V) Concluyo que el contraargumento de (...) un fanático moral no implica una contradicción dentro del prescriptivismo universal. (shrink)

Mainstream accounts of conceptual norms depict them as a specific kind of (sub)norms in as much as they establish a certain equivalence without making reference to an action-type, which implies also that they lack a deontic modalization. However, such non-prescriptive explanation raises some serious problems, mainly when it is assumed that the introduction of a conceptual norm into a normative system changes the content of the system. Those problems pave the way to contrast such explanation with a prescriptive alternative according (...) to which conceptual norms are regulative in character, though with the peculiarity of addressing the mental action of qualifying something in accordance with a given equivalence. All-things-considered, from such contrast it seems to follow that the prescriptive explanation is less problematic than the non-prescriptive one. (shrink)