Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||I consider metaethics to be a sub-branch of moral philosophy. Some of the most central questions in metaethical inquiry include the following: What are the natures of the meanings of moral terms? If there are such things as moral properties (rightness, wrongness, goodness, badness, etc.), what are their natures?|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Eivind Storheim (1966). The Purpose of Analysis in Moore's Principia Ethica. Inquiry 9 (1-4):156 – 170.
Daniel Stoljar (2006). Should Moore Have Followed His Own Method? [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 129 (3):609 - 618.
Daniel Stoljar (2006). Review: Should Moore Have Followed His Own Method? [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 129 (3):609 - 618.
Thomas Hurka, Moore's Moral Philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Philip Stratton-Lake & Brad Hooker (2006). Scanlon Versus Moore on Goodness. In Terry Horgan & Mark Timmons (eds.), Metaethics After Moore. Oxford University Press.
Mark van Roojen (2006). Knowing Enough to Disagree: A New Response to the Moral Twin Earth Argument. In Russ Shafer-Landau (ed.), Oxford Studies In Metaethics, Volume 1.
Terry Horgan & Mark Timmons (eds.) (2006). Metaethics After Moore. Oxford University Press.
Jack Temkin (1984). Singer, Moore, and the Metaphysics of Morals. Philosophy Research Archives 10:567-571.
Stephen R. L. Clark (1983). III. Morals, Moore, and Maclntyre. Inquiry 26 (4):425 – 445.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #114,517 of 739,786 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?