David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
What would morality have to be like in order to answer to our everyday moral concepts? What are we committed to when we make moral claims such as “female infibulation is wrong”; or “we ought give money to famine relief”; or “we have a duty to not to harm others”, and when we go on to argue about these sorts of claims? It has seemed to many—and it seems plausible to us—that when we assert and argue about things such as these we presuppose at least the following.
|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
Joel Marks (2010). An Amoral Manifesto Part II. Philosophy Now (81):23-26.
Joel Marks (2010). An Amoral Manifesto Part I. Philosophy Now (80):30-33.
Zed Adams (2006). Mark Eli Kalderon, Moral Fictionalism:Moral Fictionalism. Ethics 117 (1):131-135.
Mark Eli Kalderon (2008). Moral Fictionalism, the Frege-Geach Problem, and Reasonable Inference. Analysis 68 (298):133–143.
Matthew Chrisman (2008). A Dilemma for Moral Fictionalism. Philosophical Books 49 (1):4-13.
Daniel Nolan, Greg Restall & Caroline West (2004). Moral Fictionalism Versus the Rest. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83 (3):307 – 330.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads177 ( #23,325 of 1,925,045 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #187,249 of 1,925,045 )
How can I increase my downloads?