One-Person Moral Twin Earth Cases

IF 0.7 2区 哲学 Q1 Arts and Humanities Thought-A Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2019-03-01 DOI:10.1002/THT3.400
Neil Sinhababu
{"title":"One-Person Moral Twin Earth Cases","authors":"Neil Sinhababu","doi":"10.1002/THT3.400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents two cases demonstrating that theories allowing the environment to partially determine the content of moral concepts (such as the causal theory of reference) that provide incorrect truth-conditions for moral terms. While typical Moral Twin Earth cases seek to establish that these theories fail to account for moral disagreement, neither case here essentially involves interpersonal disagreement. Both involve a single person retaining moral beliefs despite recognizing actual or potential mismatches with the purportedly content-determining facts. This lets opponents of such theories grant objections that standard Moral Twin Earth cases fail to demonstrate disagreement, and argue more straightforwardly that they generate implausible truth-conditions for moral claims.","PeriodicalId":44963,"journal":{"name":"Thought-A Journal of Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/THT3.400","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thought-A Journal of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/THT3.400","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

This paper presents two cases demonstrating that theories allowing the environment to partially determine the content of moral concepts (such as the causal theory of reference) that provide incorrect truth-conditions for moral terms. While typical Moral Twin Earth cases seek to establish that these theories fail to account for moral disagreement, neither case here essentially involves interpersonal disagreement. Both involve a single person retaining moral beliefs despite recognizing actual or potential mismatches with the purportedly content-determining facts. This lets opponents of such theories grant objections that standard Moral Twin Earth cases fail to demonstrate disagreement, and argue more straightforwardly that they generate implausible truth-conditions for moral claims.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一人道德双地球案例
本文提出了两个案例,证明允许环境部分决定道德概念内容的理论(如因果参照理论)为道德术语提供了不正确的真值条件。虽然典型的道德孪生地球案例试图证明这些理论无法解释道德分歧,但这里的案例本质上都不涉及人际分歧。两者都涉及到一个人保留道德信仰,尽管他意识到与所谓的决定内容的事实存在实际或潜在的不匹配。这使得这些理论的反对者同意反对标准的道德孪生地球案例不能证明他们的分歧,并更直接地争辩说,他们为道德主张产生了难以置信的真理条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊介绍: Thought: A Journal of Philosophy is dedicated to the publication of short (of less than 4500 words), original, philosophical papers in the following areas: Logic, Philosophy of Maths, Philosophy of Mind, Epistemology, Philosophy of Language, Metaphysics, and Value Theory. All published papers will be analytic in style. We intend that readers of Thought will be exposed to the most central and significant issues and positions in contemporary philosophy that fall under its remit. We will publish only papers that exemplify the highest standard of clarity. Thought aims to give a response to all authors within eight weeks of submission. Thought employs a triple-blind review system: the author''s identity is not revealed to the editors and referees, and the referee''s identity is not revealed to the author. Every submitted paper is appraised by the Subject Editor of the relevant subject area. Papers that pass to the editors are read by at least two experts in the relevant subject area.
期刊最新文献
Subset Realization and the Entailment Problem in advance The Co-Intension Problem in advance Removing Realizers in advance Editorial Note Measurement and desert: Why grades cannot be deserved
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1