David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Social Philosophy and Policy 7 (1):1 (1989)
Moral theorists often say such things as “But surely A ought to do such and such,” or “Plainly it is morally permissible for B to do so and so,” and do not even try to prove that those judgments are true. Moreover, they often rest weight on the supposition that those judgments are true. In particular, they often rest theories on them: they take them as data. Others object. They say that nobody is entitled to rest any weight at all on judgments such as those. They say, not that the judgments are false, but that there is no reason to believe them true. They say, more generally, that there is no reason to think of any moral judgment that it is true. I will call this The No Reason Thesis. Is there reason to think The No Reason Thesis true? There are lots of arguments for it in the literature, but I want to focus on one of them in particular. I think that the one I will focus on lies behind all the others, but no matter if it does not: I suggest that if this argument fails, they all fail
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Aleksander Peczenik (1994). Law, Morality, Coherence and Truth. Ratio Juris 7 (2):146-176.
Laura Donohue & Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (1991). Years of Moral Epistemology: A Bibliography. Southern Journal of Philosophy 29 (S1):217-229.
Aulis Aarnio & Aleksander Peczenik (1995). Suum Cuique Tribuere. Some Reflections on Law, Freedom and Justice. Ratio Juris 8 (2):142-179.
Similar books and articles
John Turri (2011). Believing For a Reason. Erkenntnis 74 (3):383-397.
Aaron Z. Zimmerman (2007). Hume's Reasons. Hume Studies 33 (2):211-256.
John J. Tilley (2006). Desires and Practical Reasons. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 9:123-128.
Eugene Rice (2004). Resolving Human Rights Conflicts: Evaluating Judith Jarvis Thomson's High-Threshold Thesis. [REVIEW] Journal of Value Inquiry 38 (2):203-216.
Janet Levin (2008). Assertion, Practical Reason, and Pragmatic Theories of Knowledge. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 76 (2):359–384.
Jan Raymond Sugalski (1976). Reason and the Unity of Experience: Nietzsche's Critique of Traditional Conceptions of Totality. Dissertation, University of Florida
Mark Schroeder (2011). Buck-Passers' Negative Thesis. Philosophical Explorations 12 (3):341-347.
Tamar Schapiro (2011). Foregrounding Desire: A Defense of Kant's Incorporation Thesis. Journal of Ethics 15 (3):147-167.
Ittay Nissan-Rozen (2013). Jeffrey Conditionalization, the Principal Principle, the Desire as Belief Thesis, and Adams's Thesis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64 (4):axs039.
Allen T. Pearson (1997). Teaching, Reason and Risk. Studies in Philosophy and Education 16 (1/2):103-111.
George Santayana (1905). The Life of Reason. Prometheus Books.
Elizabeth S. Radcliffe (1999). Hume on the Generation of Motives: Why Beliefs Alone Never Motivate. Hume Studies 25 (1-2):101-122.
Duncan Pritchard (2010). Cognitive Ability and the Extended Cognition Thesis. Synthese 175 (1):133 - 151.
Steven Luper (2005). Past Desires and the Dead. Philosophical Studies 126 (3):331 - 345.
Added to index2010-08-31
Total downloads18 ( #206,417 of 1,907,366 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #466,442 of 1,907,366 )
How can I increase my downloads?