Moral judgments attempt to describe a reality that does not exist, so they are all false. This troubling view is known as the moral error theory. Christopher Cowie defends it against the most compelling counter-argument, the argument from analogy: Cowie shows that moral error theory does not compromise the practice of making epistemic judgments.
Moral judgments attempt to describe a reality that does not exist, so they are all false. This troubling view is known as the moral error theory. Christopher Cowie defends it against the most compelling counter-argument, the argument from analogy: Cowie shows that moral error theory does not compromise the practice of making epistemic judgments.
Christopher Cowie obtained his PhD from the University of Cambridge in 2014. He subsequently worked as a Research Fellow at Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge. Cowie is currently Assistant Professor in Philosophy at the University of Durham.
Inhaltsangabe
Introduction Part I. The Argument From Analogy 1: Moral Error Theory 2: The Analogy Part II. Against the Analogy 3: Against Internalism-Parity 4: Against Internalism-Parity: A Supplementary Argument 5: Against Irreducibility-Parity Part III. Elaboration 6: The Conventionalism Criticism 7: Simple Veritism 8: The Normativity of Evidence Part IV. Fall-Backs and Loose-Ends 9: Error Theory and Thought 10: A Puzzling Combination 11: Conclusion
Introduction Part I. The Argument From Analogy 1: Moral Error Theory 2: The Analogy Part II. Against the Analogy 3: Against Internalism-Parity 4: Against Internalism-Parity: A Supplementary Argument 5: Against Irreducibility-Parity Part III. Elaboration 6: The Conventionalism Criticism 7: Simple Veritism 8: The Normativity of Evidence Part IV. Fall-Backs and Loose-Ends 9: Error Theory and Thought 10: A Puzzling Combination 11: Conclusion
Es gelten unsere Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen: www.buecher.de/agb
Impressum
www.buecher.de ist ein Shop der buecher.de GmbH & Co. KG Bürgermeister-Wegele-Str. 12, 86167 Augsburg Amtsgericht Augsburg HRA 13309