Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Either there is no relation between objective moral truth... — Carmelics
    Home/Truth & Knowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Moral realism is undermined by evolutionary debunking arguments

    Either there is no relation between objective moral truths and our evolutionarily-shaped evaluative attitudes, or there is a relation

    Truth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Truth & Knowledge

    Connections

    2 topics

    Skepticism3 linkedMoral Responsibility2 linked

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Truth & Knowledge
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Related

    Evolution has strongly shaped human evaluative attitudesIf there is a relation between objective moral truths and our evaluative attitud...If there is no relation between objective moral truths and our evaluative attitu...Moral realism is undermined by evolutionary debunking arguments

    Similar

    If there is no relation between objective moral truths and our evaluat...90%If there is a relation between objective moral truths and our evaluati...86%There is no such thing as objective goodness; moral opinions are depen...82%Fully objective moral truths must be independent of human psychology o...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: moral-arguments-god
    View source passageHide passage
    Swinburne’s version of the argument is quite brief and undeveloped, but some claims that could be used to support a more developed version of the argument (one that will be described below) can be found in a well-known and much cited article by Sharon Street (2006). Street’s argument, as the title implies, is in no way intended to support a moral argument for theism. To the contrary, her purpose is to defend anti-realist metaethical theories against realist theories that view moral truth as “sta

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective