Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.741952
Title: Naturalism, normativity, and the 'open question' argument
Author: Fisher, Andrew David
Awarding Body: University of St Andrews
Current Institution: University of St Andrews
Date of Award: 2003
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
The 'open question' argument, as it has come to be known, was popularized by G. E. Moore. However, it is universally recognized that his presentation of it is unconvincing, as it is based on dubious metaphysics, semantics and epistemology. Yet, philosophers have not confined the argument to the history books, and it continues to influence and shape modern meta-ethics. This thesis asks why this is the case, and whether such an influence is justified. It focuses on three main positions, analytic naturalism, non-analytic naturalism and supernaturalism. It concludes that the 'open question' argument challenges all three.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.741952  DOI: Not available
Keywords: BJ37.F58 ; Ethics ; Naturalistic fallacy ; Good and evil
Share: