Question authority: In defense of moral naturalism without clout
Philosophical Studies (forthcoming)
| Abstract | Metaethicists of all stripes should read and learn from Richard Joyce’s book The Evolution of Morality . This includes moral realists, despite Joyce’s own nihilism. Joyce thinks that moral obligations, prohibitions, and the like are myths. But that is just a bit of a rich, broad account of moral attitudes and practices, the bulk of which can comfortably be accepted by realists. In fact, other than nihilism itself, there’s only one claim of Joyce’s which realists must reject. I argue that that claim ought to be rejected, and reply to Joyce’s argument to the contrary. The result is that—aside from nihilism and one rejectable claim—realists are free to take from Joyce whatever they like. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,865 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesPatrick Maher (2002). Joyce's Argument for Probabilism. Philosophy of Science 69 (1):73-81.
Susana Nuccetelli & Gary Seay (eds.) (2011). Ethical Naturalism: Current Debates. Cambridge University Press.
Stephen Finlay (2011). Errors Upon Errors: A Reply to Joyce. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (3):535-547.
Scott Hill (2010). Richard Joyce's New Objections to the Divine Command Theory. Journal of Religious Ethics 38 (1):189-196.
Richard Joyce (2001). The Myth of Morality. Cambridge University Press.
Ben Fraser (2012). The Nature of Moral Judgements and the Extent of the Moral Domain. Philosophical Explorations 15 (1):1-16.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-04-27Total downloads83 ( #9,317 of 556,788 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,788 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
