GET REAL(ISM): EVOLUTIONARY DEBUNKING ARGUMENTS AND MORAL REALISM

Genealogical arguments which aim to undermine some aspect of ethics by referring to its supposed evolutionary origin have become both more common and more philosophically substantive in recent years. In this thesis, I present what I take to be the strongest evolutionary debunking argument aimed agai...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Wolinsky, Max
Language:en
Published: 2013
Subjects:
EDA
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/10222/36243
id ndltd-LACETR-oai-collectionscanada.gc.ca-NSHD.ca#10222-36243
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-LACETR-oai-collectionscanada.gc.ca-NSHD.ca#10222-362432013-10-04T04:13:31ZGET REAL(ISM): EVOLUTIONARY DEBUNKING ARGUMENTS AND MORAL REALISMWolinsky, MaxEDAethicsevolutionary debunkingevolutionary ethicsSharon StreetGenealogical arguments which aim to undermine some aspect of ethics by referring to its supposed evolutionary origin have become both more common and more philosophically substantive in recent years. In this thesis, I present what I take to be the strongest evolutionary debunking argument aimed against the meta-ethical view of moral realism. Specifically, I present Sharon Street’s Darwinian Dilemma. I then consider the strongest responses given in defense of moral realism by Derek Parfit and Russ Shafer-Landau. I give reason to reject most of Parfit’s and Shafer-Landau’s responses and then suggest that due to a lack of justification for our moral beliefs (if moral realism is true) we ought to have a lower level of credence in them.2013-08-26T14:29:23Z2013-08-26T14:29:23Z2013-08-262013-08-19http://hdl.handle.net/10222/36243en
collection NDLTD
language en
sources NDLTD
topic EDA
ethics
evolutionary debunking
evolutionary ethics
Sharon Street
spellingShingle EDA
ethics
evolutionary debunking
evolutionary ethics
Sharon Street
Wolinsky, Max
GET REAL(ISM): EVOLUTIONARY DEBUNKING ARGUMENTS AND MORAL REALISM
description Genealogical arguments which aim to undermine some aspect of ethics by referring to its supposed evolutionary origin have become both more common and more philosophically substantive in recent years. In this thesis, I present what I take to be the strongest evolutionary debunking argument aimed against the meta-ethical view of moral realism. Specifically, I present Sharon Street’s Darwinian Dilemma. I then consider the strongest responses given in defense of moral realism by Derek Parfit and Russ Shafer-Landau. I give reason to reject most of Parfit’s and Shafer-Landau’s responses and then suggest that due to a lack of justification for our moral beliefs (if moral realism is true) we ought to have a lower level of credence in them.
author Wolinsky, Max
author_facet Wolinsky, Max
author_sort Wolinsky, Max
title GET REAL(ISM): EVOLUTIONARY DEBUNKING ARGUMENTS AND MORAL REALISM
title_short GET REAL(ISM): EVOLUTIONARY DEBUNKING ARGUMENTS AND MORAL REALISM
title_full GET REAL(ISM): EVOLUTIONARY DEBUNKING ARGUMENTS AND MORAL REALISM
title_fullStr GET REAL(ISM): EVOLUTIONARY DEBUNKING ARGUMENTS AND MORAL REALISM
title_full_unstemmed GET REAL(ISM): EVOLUTIONARY DEBUNKING ARGUMENTS AND MORAL REALISM
title_sort get real(ism): evolutionary debunking arguments and moral realism
publishDate 2013
url http://hdl.handle.net/10222/36243
work_keys_str_mv AT wolinskymax getrealismevolutionarydebunkingargumentsandmoralrealism
_version_ 1716601585514053632