Philosophical Quarterly 48 (192):359-365 (1998)
|Abstract||Crispin Wright holds that moral realism is implausible since it is not a priori that every moral disagreement involves cognitive shortcomings. I develop two responses to this argument. First, a realist may argue that it holds for at least one of the parties to any disagreement that he holds false background beliefs (moral or otherwise) or that his verdict to the disputed judgment fails to cohere with his system. Second, he may argue that if none of the verdicts involves shortcomings, the appropriate conclusion is that the disagreement is not genuine, since we must otherwise attribute an inexplicable error|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Sarah McGrath (2007). Moral Disagreement and Moral Expertise. In Russ Shafer-Landau (ed.), Oxford Studies in Metaethics Vol. 4. Oxford University Press.
Crispin Wright (ed.) (2001). Rails to Infinity. Harvard University Press.
Charles Sayward (2002). Is an Unpictorial Mathematical Platonism Possible? Journal of Philosophical Research 27:199-212.
B. Majors (2008). Review: Folke Tersman: Moral Disagreement. [REVIEW] Mind 117 (466):529-532.
C. S. Jenkins (2007). Entitlement and Rationality. Synthese 157 (1):25 - 45.
David Enoch (2009). How is Moral Disagreement a Problem for Realism? Journal of Ethics 13 (1):15 - 50.
Crispin Wright (1988). The Inaugural Address: Moral Values, Projection and Secondary Qualities. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 62:1 - 26.
David Bain (2004). Private Languages and Private Theorists. Philosophical Quarterly 54 (216):427 - 434.
Ralph Wedgwood (2010). The Moral Evil Demons. In Richard Feldman & Ted Warfield (eds.), Disagreement. Oxford University Press.
Folke Tersman (2006). Moral Disagreement. Cambridge University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads40 ( #33,719 of 722,873 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,757 of 722,873 )
How can I increase my downloads?