David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (4):1029-1037 (1999)
I am primarily concerned here with C. I. Lewis’s suggestion in a letter to me that some admitted defects in his ethical views might be removed by appealing to Peirce’s views on the summum bonum, which Peirce identified as the evolutionary process whereby the universe becomes more and more orderly. Since Lewis held in his published writings that what is morally obligatory can never be determined by empirical facts alone, I argue that since the alleged growing orderliness of the universe must be established empirically, Lewis cannot analyze an obligatory action as one that contributes to that process without abandoning his view that obligatoriness cannot be established empirically. I also argue that if Lewis were to abandon his opposition to a naturalistic theory of obligation, appealing to Peirce’s summum bonum would not help Lewis out of what he called his predicament in ethics
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Michael Lebuffe (2005). Spinoza's Summum Bonum. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 (2):243–266.
Fritz-Joachim von Rintelen (1977). O Bonum e o Summum Bonum no Pensamento de Tomás de Aquino. Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 33 (2/3):182 - 195.
John Greco (2006). How to Be a Pragmatist: C. I. Lewis and Humean Skepticism. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 42 (1):24-31.
Joel Isaac (2006). Why Not Lewis? Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 42 (1):54-60.
Francisco Salto & José M. Méndez (1999). Two Extensions of Lewis' S3 with Peirce's Law. Theoria 14 (3):407-411.
James Seth (1896). Is Pleasure the Summum Bonum? International Journal of Ethics 6 (4):409-424.
Daniel Greenleaf Thompson (1881). The Summum Bonum. Mind 6 (21):62-81.
Daniel Greenleaf Thompson (1881). Iv. —The Summum Bonum. Mind (21):62-81.
Henry Sturt (1900). The Doctrine of the Summum Bonum: A Criticism. Mind 9 (35):372-383.
Martin Lefebvre (2007). Peirce's Esthetics: A Taste for Signs in Art. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 43 (2):319-344.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #172,547 of 1,692,915 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #193,926 of 1,692,915 )
How can I increase my downloads?