Ratio 18 (1):82–92 (2005)
|Abstract||The nature of moral facts, and their relationship to rationality, imagination and sentiment, have been central and pressing issues in recent moral philosophy. In this paper, I discuss and criticise a meta-ethical theory put forward by Alison Denham, which views moral facts as being constituted by the responses of ideal, empathetic agents. I argue that Denham’s account is radically unstable, in that she has given us an account of the nature of such agents which is inconsistent with an independently plausible principle relating to concept acquisition. I go on to discuss one line of defence that Denham might employ, but argue that taking such a line entails abandoning what she takes to be an important advantage of her account over rival ideal-observer theories such as Michael Smith’s.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Sarah McGrath (2004). Moral Knowledge by Perception. Philosophical Perspectives 18 (1):209–228.
Theodore Guleserian (2008). Ontological Determination and the Grounding Objection to Counterfactuals of Freedom. Faith and Philosophy 25 (4):394-415.
Chris Heathwood (2009). Moral and Epistemic Open-Question Arguments. Philosophical Books 50:83-98.
Don Loeb (2005). Moral Explanations of Moral Beliefs. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (1):193–208.
Luke Robinson (2006). Moral Holism, Moral Generalism, and Moral Dispositionalism. Mind 115 (458):331-360.
Brian Edward Zamulinski (2007). Evolutionary Intuitionism: A Theory of the Origin and Nature of Moral Facts. Mcgill-Queen's University Press.
Joseph Millum (2008). A Biological Alternative to Moral Explanations. Southern Journal of Philosophy 46 (3):385-407.
A. E. Denham (2000). Metaphor and Moral Experience. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #67,558 of 549,090 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,333 of 549,090 )
How can I increase my downloads?