Meta‐normative Realism, Evolution, and Our Reasons to Survive

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 94 (4):486-502 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this article, I articulate and respond to an epistemological challenge to meta-normative realism. The challenge has it that, if realism about the normative is correct, and if evolutionary forces have significantly influenced our normative judgments, then it would be a remarkable coincidence if the content of the normative facts and our normative judgments were aligned. I criticize David Enoch's recent attempt to meet this challenge, but provide an alternative response that is structurally similar. I argue that if realism is correct, then it would be remarkable if the content of our normative judgments and the normative facts were not significantly aligned.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 106,824

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-06-26

Downloads
152 (#158,605)

6 months
9 (#459,922)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jeff Behrends
Harvard University

References found in this work

Slaves of the passions.Mark Schroeder - 2007 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Moral realism: a defence.Russ Shafer-Landau - 2003 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Taking Morality Seriously: A Defense of Robust Realism.David Enoch - 2011 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press UK.

View all 31 references / Add more references