Why not moral realism?

This paper argues for the view that moral realism is irrelevant to ethics. It recalls Aristotle's claim that the Platonic Form of the Good is irrelevant because it is not the sort of thing we can desire or pursue. Moore's account of ethics in relation to conduct and of the Ideal is woefully inadequate as a morality to live by. Peter Railton's moral realism also involves a very weak first-order moral theory. These failures are due, I claim, to the fact that Plato, Moore and Railton regard morality as a science; it is not a science, it is an art.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
 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: 13,022
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
Erin Kelly (2004). Against Naturalism in Ethics. In Mario De Caro & David Macarthur (eds.), Naturalism in Question. Harvard University Press. 259--274.

View all 8 references

Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

137 ( #8,059 of 1,410,434 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

4 ( #57,804 of 1,410,434 )

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.