Res Philosophica 91 (4):681-693 (2014)
| Authors |
|
| Abstract |
For more than 100 years, metaethicists have overlooked the best version of G. E. Moore’s Open Question argument. This despite the fact that it appears on the same page of Principia Ethica as his other, weaker versions of the argument. This better Open Question Argument does not rely on introspection of the meanings of ethical terms, and so does not fall to the standard criticisms of Moore. In this paper, I present this ‘new’ Open Question Argument and show that Moore has done to naturalistic ethics something like what Plato’s Euthyphro does to supernaturalistic ethics.
|
| Keywords | Open Question Moore Meta-Ethics Naturalism Non-Naturalism Euthyphro Ethics |
| Categories | (categorize this paper) |
| DOI | 10.11612/resphil.2014.91.4.5 |
| Options |
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Request removal from index
|
Download options
References found in this work BETA
The Language of Morals. (Reprinted From Corrected Sheets.).Richard Mervyn Hare - 1952 - Oxford, England: Oxford Clarendon Press.
Insensitive Semantics: A Defense of Semantic Minimalism and Speech Act Pluralism.Herman Cappelen & Ernest Lepore - 2005 - Wiley-Blackwell.
View all 16 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Phenomenal, Normative, and Other Explanatory Gaps: A General Diagnosis.Neil Mehta - 2019 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 98 (3):567-591.
Similar books and articles
In Defence of the Open Question Argument.Caj Strandberg - 2004 - The Journal of Ethics 8 (2):179-196.
Breathing Life Into a Dead Argument: G.E. Moore and the Open Question. [REVIEW]Andrew Altman - 2004 - Philosophical Studies 117 (3):395-408.
Desiring to Desire: Russell, Lewis and G.E.Moore.Charles Pigden - 2007 - In Susana Nuccetelli & Gary Seay (eds.), Themes from G.E.Moore. Oxford University Press. pp. 244-260.
Naturalism in Metaethics.Jussi Suikkanen - 2016 - In Kelly James Clark (ed.), Blackwell Companion to Naturalism. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 351-368.
Reductionism in Ethics and Science: A Contemporary Look at G. E. Moore's Open-Question Argument.Stephen W. Ball - 1988 - American Philosophical Quarterly 25 (3):197 - 213.
Against Normative Naturalism.Matthew S. Bedke - 2012 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (1):111 - 129.
Knowing Enough to Disagree: A New Response to the Moral Twin Earth Argument.Mark van Roojen - 2006 - In Russ Shafer-Landau (ed.), Oxford Studies in Metaethics, Volume 1. Clarendon Press. pp. 161-94.
Moore's Open Question Argument.Bruno Verbeek - 2011 - In Michael Bruce & Steven Barbone (eds.), Just the Arguments: 100 of the Most Important Arguments in Western Philosophy. Wiley-Blackwell.
The Is-Ought Problem, the Open Question Argument, and the New Science of Morality.Radim Bělohrad - 2011 - Human Affairs 21 (3):262-271.
Why Moore's Open Question is Open: The Evolution of Moral Supervenience. [REVIEW]Richmond Campbell & Jennifer Woodrow - 2003 - Journal of Value Inquiry 37 (3):353-372.
Comments on Mark Kalderon's “The Open Question Argument, Frege's Puzzle, and Leibniz's Law”.Peter Alward - unknown
Moral and Epistemic Open-Question Arguments.Chris Heathwood - 2009 - Philosophical Books 50 (2):83-98.
Review of G.E.Moore’s Ethical Theory by Brian Hutchinson. [REVIEW]Charles Pigden - 2004 - International Philosophical Quarterly:543-547.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2014-11-07
Total views
175 ( #67,064 of 2,507,562 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
13 ( #59,825 of 2,507,562 )
2014-11-07
Total views
175 ( #67,064 of 2,507,562 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
13 ( #59,825 of 2,507,562 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads
