David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Inquiry 30 (4):451-458 (1987)
It is argued that there are moral costs of our accepting ?strict materialism?, the view that there is no such phenomenon as an irreducible first?person point of view. If we accept strict materialism, then we have to give up some considered moral views, such as the principle of an agent?relative morality and the hedonistic principle. The necessity involved is not logical, however, but pragmatic. Strict materialism does not imply that these moral views are false; it is our belief in them that is undermined by pur belief in strict materialism. If there is no irreducible first?person point of view these moral views simply do not seem to make any moral sense. Since these moral views are prima facie very plausible, the moral costs of our accepting strict materialism are considerable
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(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
Thomas Nagel (1979/2012). Mortal Questions. Cambridge University Press.
Thomas Nagel (1986). The View From Nowhere. Oxford University Press.
John Jamieson Carswell Smart & Bernard Williams (1973). Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Kai Nielsen (1989). Marxism and the Moral Point of View: Morality, Ideology, and Historical Materialism. Westview Press.
Peter J. Arnold (1994). Sport and Moral Education. Journal of Moral Education 23 (1):75-89.
Kyle Swan (2010). Legal Toleration for Belief and Behaviour. History of Political Thought 31 (1):87-106.
Andrew Reisner (2009). The Possibility of Pragmatic Reasons for Belief and the Wrong Kind of Reasons Problem. Philosophical Studies 145 (2):257 - 272.
J. P. Bendegem (2012). A Defense of Strict Finitism. Constructivist Foundations 7 (2):141-149.
Philip Pettit & Michael Smith (1990). Backgrounding Desire. Philosophical Review 99 (4):565-592.
Roger A. Shiner & Jeremy Hoemsen (2006). A. P. Simester (Ed): Appraising Strict Liability. Criminal Law and Philosophy 1 (1):119-122.
B. C. Postow (2007). Toward Honest Ethical Pluralism. Philosophical Studies 132 (2):191 - 210.
Antony Duff (2009). Legal and Moral Responsibility. Philosophy Compass 4 (6):978-986.
Torbj (1987). Moral Doubts About Strict Materialism. Inquiry 30 (4):451 – 458.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads1 ( #459,516 of 1,101,947 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #306,569 of 1,101,947 )
How can I increase my downloads?