WorldCat Linked Data Explorer

http://worldcat.org/entity/work/id/19438645

Moral Skepticims

Moral epistemology is the term for thinking about how a moral belief can be justified. All contentious moral issues -from gay marriage to terrorism - raise difficult questions about the formation and status of moral beliefs. If we do form an opinion, how is that belief justified, particularly when others may feel quite differently? And, even if we reach a consensus, how is that unanimous belief justified? These questions raise fundamental issues about the nature of morality, language, metaphysics, and justification and knowledge; but they also have tremendous practical importance regarding how to (if indeed we can) resolve controversial moral issues in health care ethics, politics, the law, and education. Most agree that moral nihilism - the idea that moral beliefs simply cannot be justified - is undesirable. Sinnott-Armstrong, here, provides an extensive survey of this difficult subject, tackling, such questions as: does knowledge require true belief? Are any moral beliefs true, and are any justified?; The second half of the book brings into dialogue various moral theories that have grappled with these questions, such as naturalism, normativism, intuitionism, and coherentism, all of which are attempts to answer moral skepticism. Sinnott-Armstrong finds all of these theories lacking in their ability to fight off moral nihilism. He defends his own theory, which he calls "moderate moral skepticism," which argues that some moral beliefs can be modestly justified, but not extremely justified.

Open All Close All

http://schema.org/about

http://schema.org/description

  • "Addresses almost all contentious moral issues - from gay marriage to abortion and affirmative action - which raise difficult questions about the justification of moral beliefs. The questions lead to fundamental issues about the nature of morality, language, metaphysics, justification, and knowledge."
  • "Moral epistemology is the term for thinking about how a moral belief can be justified. All contentious moral issues -from gay marriage to terrorism - raise difficult questions about the formation and status of moral beliefs. If we do form an opinion, how is that belief justified, particularly when others may feel quite differently? And, even if we reach a consensus, how is that unanimous belief justified? These questions raise fundamental issues about the nature of morality, language, metaphysics, and justification and knowledge; but they also have tremendous practical importance regarding how to (if indeed we can) resolve controversial moral issues in health care ethics, politics, the law, and education. Most agree that moral nihilism - the idea that moral beliefs simply cannot be justified - is undesirable. Sinnott-Armstrong, here, provides an extensive survey of this difficult subject, tackling, such questions as: does knowledge require true belief? Are any moral beliefs true, and are any justified?; The second half of the book brings into dialogue various moral theories that have grappled with these questions, such as naturalism, normativism, intuitionism, and coherentism, all of which are attempts to answer moral skepticism. Sinnott-Armstrong finds all of these theories lacking in their ability to fight off moral nihilism. He defends his own theory, which he calls "moderate moral skepticism," which argues that some moral beliefs can be modestly justified, but not extremely justified."@en
  • "Sinnott-Armstrong here provides an extensive survey of the difficult subject of moral beliefs. He covers theories that grapple with questions of morality such as naturalism, normativism, intuitionism, and coherentism. He then defends his own theory that he calls "moderate moral skepticism," which is that moral beliefs can be justified, but not extremely justified."@en
  • ""All contentious moral issues - from gay marriage to abortion and affirmative action - raise difficult questions about the justification of moral beliefs. How can we be justified in holding on to our own moral beliefs while recognizing that other intelligent people feel quite differently and that many moral beliefs are distorted by self-interest and by corrupt cultures? Even when almost everyone agrees - e.g. that experimental surgery without consent is immoral - can we know that such beliefs are true? If so, how?" "These profound questions lead to fundamental issues about the nature of morality, language, metaphysics, justification, and knowledge. They also have tremendous practical importance in handling controversial moral questions in health care ethics, politics, law, and education. Walter Sinnott-Armstrong here provides an extensive overview of these difficult subjects, looking at a wide variety of questions, including: Are any moral beliefs true? Are any justified? What is justified belief? The second half of the book explores various moral theories that have grappled with these issues, such as naturalism, normativism, intuitionism, and coherentism, all of which are attempts to answer moral skepticism. Sinnott-Armstrong argues that all these approaches fail to rule out moral nihilism - the view that nothing is really morally wrong or right, bad or good. Then he develops his own novel theory, - "moderate Pyrrhonian moral skepticism"--Which concludes that some moral beliefs can be justified out of a modest contrast class but no moral beliefs can be justified out of an extreme contrast class. While explaining this original position and criticizing alternatives, Sinnott-Armstrong provides a wide-ranging survey of the epistemology of moral beliefs."--Jacket."

http://schema.org/genre

  • "Llibres electrònics"
  • "Electronic books"@en

http://schema.org/name

  • "Moral Skepticims"@en
  • "Moral Skepticisms"@en
  • "Moral Skepticisms"
  • "Moral skepticims"
  • "Moral skepticisms"@en
  • "Moral skepticisms"