Causal Impotence and Evolutionary Influence: Epistemological Challenges for Non-Naturalism

Two epistemological critiques of non-naturalism are not always carefully distinguished. According to the Causal Objection, the fact that moral properties cannot cause our moral beliefs implies that it would be a coincidence if many of them were true. According to the Evolutionary Objection, the fact...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Crow, Daniel (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Springer Science + Business Media B. V [2016]
In: Ethical theory and moral practice
Year: 2016, Volume: 19, Issue: 2, Pages: 379-395
RelBib Classification:NCA Ethics
VA Philosophy
VB Hermeneutics; Philosophy
Further subjects:B Moral Realism
B Evolutionary debunking
B Hartry Field
B moral epistemology
B Sharon Street
Online Access: Volltext (Verlag)
Volltext (doi)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 156574330X
003 DE-627
005 20171127152009.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 171127s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1007/s10677-015-9625-1  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)156574330X 
035 |a (DE-576)495743305 
035 |a (DE-599)BSZ495743305 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Crow, Daniel  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Causal Impotence and Evolutionary Influence  |b Epistemological Challenges for Non-Naturalism  |c Daniel Crow 
264 1 |c [2016] 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Two epistemological critiques of non-naturalism are not always carefully distinguished. According to the Causal Objection, the fact that moral properties cannot cause our moral beliefs implies that it would be a coincidence if many of them were true. According to the Evolutionary Objection, the fact that evolutionary pressures have influenced our moral beliefs implies a similar coincidence. After distinguishing these epistemological critiques, I provide an extensive defense of the Causal Objection that also strengthens the Evolutionary Objection. In particular, I formulate a “Master Causal Objection” featuring the controversial premise that non-naturalism can provide no adequate explanation for moral knowledge. I defend this premise by first narrowing down the range of candidate explanations to conceptual, constitutive, and evolutionary explanations, and then considering and eliminating each of these in turn. My discussion of evolutionary explanations suggests that non-naturalists must refute the Causal Objection in order to refute the Evolutionary Objection. 
601 |a Influencer 
601 |a Challenger 
650 4 |a Evolutionary debunking 
650 4 |a Hartry Field 
650 4 |a moral epistemology 
650 4 |a Moral Realism 
650 4 |a Sharon Street 
652 |a NCA:VA:VB 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Ethical theory and moral practice  |d Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 1998  |g 19(2016), 2, Seite 379-395  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)320527093  |w (DE-600)2015306-5  |w (DE-576)104558555  |x 1572-8447  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:19  |g year:2016  |g number:2  |g pages:379-395 
856 4 0 |u https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-015-9625-1  |x Verlag  |3 Volltext 
856 |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-015-9625-1  |x doi  |3 Volltext 
936 u w |d 19  |j 2016  |e 2  |h 379-395 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 2988302200 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 156574330X 
LOK |0 005 20191104102900 
LOK |0 008 171127||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixzo 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1442053844  |a VA 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 144205381X  |a VB 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1442052465  |a NCA 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
SUB |a REL