Winch and Anscombe on Ethics and Religion

Philosophical Investigations 34 (3):241-248 (2011)
The aim of this paper is to consider in detail a paper in which Peter Winch discusses the absolute nature of the moral ought. Anscombe had argued that the notion of an absolute ought presupposes the idea of divine law. Winch's aim is to show her mistaken. On his view, it is the idea of divine that depends on the notion of an absolute ought.It is argued that Winch is not successful in his criticism. Indeed, were we to accept his assumptions, we should be forced to conclude that the moral ought is not absolute at all, but relative
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9205.2011.01445.x
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 16,667
External links
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Berel Dov Lerner (1995). Winch and Instrumental Pluralism. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 25 (2):180-191.
Mikel Burley (2010). Winch and Wittgenstein on Moral Harm and Absolute Safety. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 67 (2):81 - 94.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

14 ( #184,535 of 1,726,249 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #369,877 of 1,726,249 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.