Approving on the Basis of Moral and Aesthetic Testimony

Oxford Studies in Metaethics (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

If a reliable testifier tells you that a song is beautiful or that an act is wrong, do you thereby have a reason to approve of the painting and disapprove of the agent's action? Many insist that we don’t: normative testimony does not give us reasons for affective attitudes like approval. This answer is often treated as a datum in the literatures on moral and aesthetic testimony. I argue that once we correct for a common methodological mistake in these literatures, the answer must be Yes. I then show why this matters for the broader discussion of the puzzle(s) posed by deference to moral and aesthetic testimony.

Author's Profile

Daniel Wodak
University of Pennsylvania

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-03-16

Downloads
294 (#48,305)

6 months
99 (#34,035)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?