Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (2):159 - 182 (2007)

Abstract
In this article (1) I extract from Brentano’s works (three) formal arguments against “genealogical explanations” of ethical claims. Such explanation can also be designated as “naturalism” (not his appellation); (2) I counter these arguments, by showing how genealogical explanations of even apodictic moral claims are logically possible (albeit only if certain unlikely, stringent conditions are met); (3) I show how Nietzsche’s ethics meets these stringent conditions, but evolutionary ethics does not. My more general thesis is that naturalism and intuitionism in ethics need not be mutually incompatible.
Keywords Brentano’s ethics  Darwinian ethics  evolutionary ethics  genetic fallacy  intuitionism  moral intuition  Nietzsche  naturalistic fallacy  naturalism  psychologism
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10677-006-9055-1
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,337
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Principia Ethica.George Edward Moore - 1903 - Dover Publications.
Principia Ethica.G. E. Moore - 1903 - Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 13 (3):7-9.

View all 30 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
89 ( #131,191 of 2,508,064 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,711 of 2,508,064 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes