Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Can Moral Anti-Realists Theorize?Michael Zhao - 2024 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 102 (3):693-709.
    Call ‘radical moral theorizing’ the project of developing a moral theory that not only tries to conform to our existing moral judgments, but also manifests various theoretical virtues: consistency, simplicity, explanatory depth, and so on. Many moral philosophers assume that radical moral theorizing does not require any particular metaethical commitments. In this paper, I argue against this assumption. The most natural justification for radical moral theorizing presupposes moral realism, broadly construed; in contrast, there may be no justification for radical moral (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Reflective equilibrium and antitheory.François Schroeter - 2004 - Noûs 38 (1):110–134.
    The paper clarifies what is at stake in the theory/antitheory debate in ethics and articulates the distinctive core of the method of reflective equilibrium which distinguishes it from a generic coherence constraint. I call this distinctive core 'maieutic reflection'. The paper then argues that if she accepts constructivist views in metaethics, a proponent of the method of reflective equilibrium will be committed to the existence of a moral theory.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • (1 other version)Afterword: Whither Moral Philosophy?Jocelyne Couture & Kai Nielsen - 1995 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 25 (sup1):273-337.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (1 other version)Afterword: Whither Moral Philosophy?Jocelyne Couture & Kai Nielsen - 1995 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Supplementary Volume 21:273-337.
    Most of the essays collected here are essaysinmetaethics seeking in exacting and interesting ways to resolve problems raised by the familiar options in metaethics we outlined in our Introduction. Richard Brandt, for example, forcefully argues, going much against the at least modestly holistic grain of our time, for a foundationalism (noncognitivist though it be) which would be foundational in both metaethics and normative ethics. R.M. Hare makes a brief but systematic defense, which is both spirited and clear, of his prescriptivism (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark