Moral judgments attempt to describe a reality that does not exist, so they are all false. This is the moral error theory, a deeply troubling yet plausible view that is now one of the canonical positions in moral philosophy. The most compelling argument against it is the argument from analogy. According to this, the moral error theory should be rejected because it would seriously compromise our practice of making epistemic judgments-judgments about how weought to form and revise our beliefs in light of our evidence-and could undermine systematic thought and reason themselves. Christopher Cowie provides a novel assessment of the recent attention paid to this topic in moral philosophy and epistemology. He reasons that the argument from analogy fails because moraljudgments are unlike judgments about how we ought to form and revise our beliefs in light of our evidence. On that basis, a moral error theory does not compromise the practice of making epistemic judgments. The moral error theory may be true after all, Cowie concludes, and if it is then we will simply have to live with its concerning consequences.
Christopher Cowie
Morality and Epistemic Judgement [PDF ebook]
The Argument From Analogy
Morality and Epistemic Judgement [PDF ebook]
The Argument From Analogy
Beli ebook ini dan dapatkan 1 lagi PERCUMA!
Bahasa Inggeris ● Format PDF ● Halaman-halaman 160 ● ISBN 9780192580429 ● Penerbit OUP Oxford ● Diterbitkan 2019 ● Muat turun 3 kali ● Mata wang EUR ● ID 8103587 ● Salin perlindungan Adobe DRM
Memerlukan pembaca ebook yang mampu DRM