Journal of Value Inquiry 41:201-220 (2007)
|Abstract||Many expressivists have employed a claim about the practicality of morality in support of their view that moral convictions are not purely descriptive mental states. In this paper I argue that all extant arguments of this form fail. I distinguish several versions of such arguments and argue that in each case either the sense of practicality the argument employs is too weak, in which case there is no reason to think that descriptive states cannot be practical or the sense of practicality the argument employs is too strong, in which case there is no reason to think moral convictions are practical. I also discuss and dismiss an attempted patch of such arguments provided by Humean Psychology. The conclusion is that expressivists need to look to sources other than the alleged practicality of morality to support their position. In concluding remarks I suggest one such alternative.|
|Keywords||Expressivism Humean Psychology|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Klemens Kappel (2011). Is Epistemic Expressivism Dialectically Incoherent? Dialectica 65 (1):49-69.
Michael Smith (2001). The Incoherence Argument: Reply to Schafer-Landau. Analysis 61 (3):254–266.
Caj Strandberg (2012). Expressivism and Dispositional Desires. American Philosophical Quarterly 49 (1):81-91.
Jeff Wisdom (2009). A Defense of Descriptive Moral Content. Southern Journal of Philosophy 47 (3):285-300.
Jiyuan Yu (2010). The Practicality of Ancient Virtue Ethics: Greece and China. Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 9 (3):289-302.
Neil Sinclair (2006). The Moral Belief Problem. Ratio 19 (2):249–260.
Jussi Suikkanen (2009). The Subjectivist Consequences of Expressivism. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 90 (3):364-387.
David Merli (2008). Expressivism and the Limits of Moral Disagreement. Journal of Ethics 12 (1):25 - 55.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads48 ( #22,874 of 556,807 )
Recent downloads (6 months)18 ( #3,864 of 556,807 )
How can I increase my downloads?