Review of Metaphysics 58 (3):667-669 (2005)

The author accepts a conventional moral dilemma: Either we have a firm, rational foundation for our judgments about right and wrong, or we drown in a merciless sea of historical and sociological relativism. He advances and defends “new transcendental arguments” that supposedly demonstrate that we cannot rationally deny some propositions that are necessary for reasoning itself. If these propositions cannot be rejected rationally then they should be embraced as justified and true. As such, they can provide a firm, rational foundation for our judgments about right and wrong.
Keywords Catholic Tradition  Contemporary Philosophy  General Interest
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0034-6632
DOI revmetaph200558318
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 62,205
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Studying Judgement: General Issues.Nigel Harvey - 2001 - Thinking and Reasoning 7 (1):103 – 118.
Virtue Ethics, Theory, and Warrant.Garrett Cullity - 1999 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2 (3):277-294.
Principle-Based Moral Judgement.Maike Albertzart - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (2):339-354.
Kant: The Audacity of Judgement.Rocque Reynolds - 1999 - Res Publica 5 (1):67-82.
Ethical Judgement.Abraham Edel - 1955 - Glencoe, Ill., Free Press.


Added to PP index

Total views
23 ( #470,636 of 2,444,718 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #457,256 of 2,444,718 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes