Metaphysics and morals

In Mario de Caro & David Macarthur (eds.), Naturalism and Normativity. Columbia University Press. 7 - 22 (2010)
This essay argues that normative judgments, in general, and moral judgments, in particular, are "truth apt" and can be objects of belief. Other main claims are: judgments about reasons, if interpreted as true, do not have metaphysical implications that are incompatible with a scientific view of the world. Two kinds of normative claims should be distinguished: substantive claims about what reasons people have and structural claims about what attitudes people must have insofar as they are rational. Employing this distinction, the practical significance of substantive normative judgments is explained, and critical analysis of expressivist and Kantian views on this question is offered
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: 9,357
External links
  •   Try with proxy.
  • Through your library Configure
    References found in this work BETA

    No references found.

    Citations of this work BETA
    James Lenman (2007). Expressivism and Epistemology: What is Moral Inquiry? Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 81 (1):63–81.

    View all 6 citations

    Similar books and articles

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index


    Total downloads

    90 ( #10,942 of 1,088,404 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    3 ( #30,936 of 1,088,404 )

    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.