Mind 118 (472):1081-1094 (2009)
|Abstract||Roger Crisp distinguishes a positive and a negative aspect of the buck-passing account of goodness (BPA), and argues that the positive account should be dropped in order to avoid certain problems, in particular, that it implies eliminativism about value. This eliminativism involves what I call an ontological claim, the claim that there is no real property of goodness, and an error theory, the claim that all value talk is false. I argue first that the positive aspect of the BPA is necessary to explain the negative aspect. I accept the ontological claim but argue that this does not imply any sort of error theory about value|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jussi Suikkanen (2005). Reasons and Value – in Defence of the Buck-Passing Account. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (5):513 - 535.
Patrick H. Byrne (2007). The Goodness of Being in Lonergan's Insight. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 81 (1):43-72.
David McNaughton & Piers Rawling (2003). Can Scanlon Avoid Redundancy by Passing the Buck? Analysis 63 (4):328–331.
Roger Crisp (2005). Value, Reasons and the Structure of Justification: How to Avoid Passing the Buck. Analysis 65 (285):80–85.
Jussi Suikkanen (2007). Reasons and the Good – Roger Crisp. Philosophical Quarterly 57 (228):503–505.
Roger Crisp (2006). Reasons and the Good. Clarendon Press.
Jonas Olson (2006). G. E. Moore on Goodness and Reasons. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84 (4):525 – 534.
S. Matthew Liao (2010). The Buck-Passing Account of Value: Lessons From Crisp. Philosophical Studies 151 (3):421-432.
Roger Crisp (2009). Goodness and Reasons: A Response to Stratton-Lake. Mind 118 (472):1095-1099.
Roger Crisp (2008). Goodness and Reasons: Accentuating the Negative. Mind 117 (466):257-265.
Added to index2010-02-08
Total downloads30 ( #40,914 of 549,766 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 549,766 )
How can I increase my downloads?