Is, Ought, and the Regress Argument

Australasian Journal of Philosophy 97 (3):528-543 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Many take the claim that you cannot ‘get’ an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’ to imply that non- moral beliefs are by themselves incapable of justifying moral beliefs. I argue that this is a mistake and that the position that moral beliefs are justified exclusively by non-moral beliefs—a view that I call moral inferentialism—presents an attractive non-sceptical moral epistemology.
(categorize this paper)
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2019-04-02
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
187 ( #36,342 of 69,105 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
20 ( #39,097 of 69,105 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.