Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-pkt8n Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-08T10:15:14.398Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Four Epistemological Challenges to Ethical Naturalism: Naturalized Epistemology and the First-Person Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2009

David Copp
Affiliation:
University of Florida
Get access

Summary

Ethical naturalism is the doctrine that moral properties, such as moral goodness, justice, rightness, and wrongness, are among the ‘natural’ properties that things can have. It is the doctrine that moral properties are ‘natural’ and that morality is in this sense an aspect of ‘nature.’ Accordingly, it is a view about the semantics and metaphysics of moral discourse. For example, a utilitarian naturalist might propose that wrongness is the property an action could have of being such as to undermine overall happiness, where happiness is taken to be a psychological property. Unfortunately, it is unclear what the naturalist means by a ‘natural’ property. For my purposes in this chapter, I shall assume that natural properties are such that our knowledge of them is fundamentally empirical, grounded in observation. More precisely, a property is ‘natural’ just in case any synthetic proposition about its instantiation can be known only a posteriori, or with the aid of experience. Ethical naturalism is, in short, the doctrine that there are moral properties and that they are natural properties. It implies that moral knowledge is fundamentally empirical. It is committed to a broadly ‘empiricist’ moral epistemology.

This chapter springs from the fact that certain unsurprising commonsense first-personal observations about our moral thinking can appear to undermine ethical naturalism by undermining the plausibility of the idea that our moral knowledge is empirical.

Type
Chapter
Information
Morality in a Natural World
Selected Essays in Metaethics
, pp. 55 - 92
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aberle, D. F., Cohen, A. K., Davis, A. K., Levy, M. J. Jr., and Sutton, F. X.. 1950. “The Functional Prerequisities of a Society.” Ethics 60: 100–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Audi, Robert. 1996. “Intuitionism, Pluralism, and the Foundations of Ethics.” In Sinnott-Armstrong and Timmons 1996: 101–136.
Benacerraf, Paul. 1973. “Mathematical Truth.” Journal of Philosophy 70: 661–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackburn, Simon. 1988. “How to Be an Ethical Antirealist.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 12: 361–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackburn, Simon. 1993. Essays in Quasi-Realism. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Churchland, Paul. 1996. “Neural Representation and the Social World.” In Mind and Morals: Essays on Cognitive Science and Ethics, ed. May, Larry, Friedman, Marilyn, and Clark, Andy, 91–108. Cambridge: Bradford Books of MIT Press.Google Scholar
Copp, David. 1995. Morality, Normativity, and Society. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Copp, David. 1996. “Moral Knowledge in Society-Centered Moral Theory.” In Sinnott-Armstrong and Timmons 1996: 243–266.Google Scholar
Copp, David. 1997. “Does Moral Theory Need the Concept of Society?” Analyse und Kritik 19: 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copp, David. 1998. “Morality and Society – The True and the Nasty: Reply to Leist.” Analyse und Kritik 20: 30–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copp, David. 1999. “The Idea of a Legitimate State.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 28: 3–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancy, Jonathan. 1993. Moral Reasons. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Daniels, Norman. 1979. “Wide Reflective Equilibrium and Theory Acceptance in Ethics.” Journal of Philosophy 76: 256–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estes, William. 1986. “Array Models for Category Learning.” Cognitive Psychology 18: 500–549.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibbard, Allan. 1990. Wise Choices, Apt Feelings. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Goldman, Alvin I. 1979. “What Is Justified Belief?” In Justification and Knowledge, ed. Pappas, George S., 1–23. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, Alvin I.. 1993. “Ethics and Cognitive Science.” Ethics 103: 337–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harman, Gilbert. 1977. The Nature of Morality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kim, Jaegwon. 1993. “What Is ‘Naturalized Epistemology’?” In Supervenience and Mind: Selected Philosophical Essays, 216–236. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Jeffrey C. 1994. “Can Propositions Be Naturalistically Acceptable?” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 19: 53–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornblith, Hilary. 1985a. “Introduction: What is Naturalistic Epistemology?” In Kornblith 1985b: 1–14.
Kornblith, Hilary, ed. 1985b. Naturalizing Epistemology. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mackie, J. L. 1977. Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.Google Scholar
Medin, Douglas, and Schaffer, M. M.. 1978. “A Context Theory of Classification Learning.” Psychological Review 85: 207–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, G. E. 1903. Principia Ethica. Ed. Baldwin, Thomas. Rpt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
Mullen, Peter. 1983. “What's Wrong Can Never Be Right.” Manchester Guardian Weekly (December 4): 4.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1969a. “Epistemology Naturalized.” In Quine 1969c: 69–90.
Quine, W. V. O.. 1969b. “Natural Kinds.” In Quine 1969c: 26–68.
Quine, W. V. O.. 1969c. Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O.. 1990. In Pursuit of Truth. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Railton, Peter. 1986. “Moral Realism.” Philosophical Review 95: 163–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Scanlon, T. M. 1998. What We Owe to Each Other. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter, and Timmons, Mark, eds. 1996. Moral Knowledge? New Readings in Moral Epistemology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Steiner, Mark. 1973. “Platonism and the Causal Theory of Knowledge.” Journal of Philosophy 70: 57–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stitch, Stephen. 1993. “Moral Philosophy and Mental Representation.” In The Origin of Values, ed. Hechter, Michael, Nadel, Lynn, and Michod, Richard E., 215–228. Hawthorne, N.Y.: Aldine de Gruyter.
Stroud, Barry. 1985. “The Significance of Naturalized Epistemology.” In Kornblith 1985b: 71–89.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×