David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Metaphilosophy 39 (4-5):508-529 (2008)
Abstract: We sometimes say our moral claims are "objectively true," or are "right, even if nobody believes it." These additional claims are often taken to be staking out metaethical positions, representative of a certain kind of theorizing about morality that "steps outside" the practice in order to comment on its status. Ronald Dworkin has argued that skepticism about these claims so understood is not tenable because it is impossible to step outside such practices. I show that externally skeptical metaethical theory can withstand his attacks, thereby defending the possibility of this kind of metatheoretical method and showing that the additional objectivity claims still make sense as external claims. Four interpretations of the additional objectivity claims can still be understood externally: as secondary properties, as arguing for some form of causal correspondence, as explaining error, and under Blackburn's expressivism. In the end, Dworkin's argument can be turned against itself.
|Keywords||metaethics subjectivism external skepticism Ronald Dworkin Simon Blackburn expressivism cognitivism skepticism about moral truth internalism relativism externalism Archimedean skepticism methodology|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Simon Blackburn (1998/2000). Ruling Passions. Oxford University Press.
Crispin Wright (1992). Truth and Objectivity. Harvard University Press.
R. M. Dworkin (1988). Law's Empire. Harvard University Press.
Richard Rorty (1982). Consequences of Pragmatism. University of Minnesota Press.
Ronald Dworkin (2006). Justice in Robes. Belknap Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Patrick Clipsham (2015). Developing a Post-Prior Taxonomy of Ethical Sentences. Philosophia 43 (3):801-820.
Patrick Clipsham (2013). In Defense of Anti‐Archimedean Moral Realism: A Response to Recent Critics. Metaphilosophy 44 (4):470-484.
Similar books and articles
Jon Tresan (2009). Metaethical Internalism: Another Neglected Distinction. [REVIEW] Journal of Ethics 13 (1):51 - 72.
Stephen Finlay (2008). The Error in the Error Theory. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86 (3):347-369.
Karen Jones (2006). Metaethics and Emotions Research: A Response to Prinz. Philosophical Explorations 9 (1):45-53.
Matthew Chrisman (2010). Expressivism, Inferentialism, and the Theory of Meaning. In Michael Brady (ed.), New Waves in Metaethics. Palgrave-Macmillan
Guy Kahane (2013). Must Metaethical Realism Make a Semantic Claim? Journal of Moral Philosophy 10 (2):148-178.
Tristram McPherson (2008). Metaethics & the Autonomy of Morality. Philosophers' Imprint 8 (6):1-16.
Andrew Reisner (2010). Metaethics for Everyone. Problema 4:39-64.
Neil Levy (2006). Cognitive Scientific Challenges to Morality. Philosophical Psychology 19 (5):567 – 587.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads57 ( #72,692 of 1,792,099 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #80,477 of 1,792,099 )
How can I increase my downloads?