Moore's Open Question Maneuvering
| 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 | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,653 |
| External links | This entry has no external links. Add one. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesTerry Horgan & Mark Timmons (eds.) (2006). Metaethics After Moore. Oxford University Press.
Andrew Altman (2004). Breathing Life Into a Dead Argument: G.E. Moore and the Open Question. Philosophical Studies 117 (3):395-408.
Stephen R. L. Clark (1983). III. Morals, Moore, and Maclntyre. Inquiry 26 (4):425 – 445.
Jack Temkin (1984). Singer, Moore, and the Metaphysics of Morals. Philosophy Research Archives 10:567-571.
Richmond Campbell & Jennifer Woodrow (2003). Why Moore's Open Question is Open: The Evolution of Moral Supervenience. Journal of Value Inquiry 37 (3):353-372.
Richmond Campbell & Jennifer Woodrow (2003). Why Moore's Open Question is Open: The Evolution of Moral Supervenience. Journal of Value Inquiry 37 (3):353-372.
Caj Strandberg (2004). In Defence of the Open Question Argument. Journal of Ethics 8 (2):179-196.
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.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-04-09Total downloads32 ( #37,849 of 548,980 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
