Graduate studies at Western
Theoria 16 (2):331-352 (2001)
|Abstract||In this paper, I am concerned with the possibility of applying an abductive strategy in founding ethical realism. First, I criticize Harman’s position, according to which abduction, though useful for founding scientific realism, does not serve to found ethical realism. Secondly, I examine Sturgeon’s critique, according to which distinctively moral facts do constitute the best explanations of the moral evidence. Finally,I conclude that Sturgeon is right in as far as the ontological status of moral properties is concerned but his answer to Harman’s point is not properly developed|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Russ Shafer-Landau (2003/2005). Moral Realism: A Defence. Oxford University Press.
Neil Sinclair (2011). The Explanationist Argument for Moral Realism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 41 (1):1-24.
David Enoch (2009). How is Moral Disagreement a Problem for Realism? Journal of Ethics 13 (1):15 - 50.
William A. Rottschaefer (1999). Moral Learning and Moral Realism: How Empirical Psychology Illuminates Issues in Moral Ontology. Behavior and Philosophy 27 (1):19 - 49.
Charles Sayward (1989). Do Moral Explanations Matter? Philosophy Research Archives 14:137-142.
Sami Paavola (2006). Hansonian and Harmanian Abduction as Models of Discovery. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 20 (1):93 – 108.
Christian Miller (2009). The Conditions of Moral Realism. Journal of Philosophical Research 34:123-155.
Ilkka Niiniluoto (2007). Abduction and Scientific Realism. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 12:137-142.
Ilkka Niiniluoto (1999). Defending Abduction. Philosophy of Science 66 (3):451.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads2 ( #246,325 of 739,324 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,243 of 739,324 )
How can I increase my downloads?