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
    If moral skeptics borrow the burden-of-proof asymmetry fr... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Moral skeptics can criticize any moral belief or theory without offering a positive argument for moral skepticism.

    If moral skeptics borrow the burden-of-proof asymmetry from epistemology without argument, they presuppose a metaethical position—noncognitivism or error theory—that itself demands positive defense.

    ?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.

    Key Terms

    Asymmetry (burden-of-proof asymmetry)(the specific unfair advantage moral skeptics use)
    An imbalance where one side has to do more work than the other—in this case, where skeptics expect others to prove morality exists, but don't have to prove it doesn't.
    Metaethics(as the general field this statement appears in)
    The branch of philosophy that asks questions about morality itself—like whether moral truths actually exist, or what makes something right or wrong.
    Moral skeptics(the main group being discussed)
    Philosophers who doubt whether we can really know anything about morality, or whether moral claims can be true or false at all.
    Presuppose(what both foundationalisms supposedly do)
    To assume or take for granted something as true in order to make an argument work, without proving it first.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    burden of proof(Used to frame the default presumption against coercive institutional structures.)
    The obligation on institutions employing authority, hierarchy, or domination to demonstrate that such arrangements are justified given existing conditions.
    epistemology(Contrasted with purely descriptive scientific inquiry)
    A normative enterprise that tells us how we ought to reason from evidence and how we ought to justify our beliefs, as distinct from merely describing how we do reason or justify beliefs
    error theory(The error theoretic conclusion is what Streumer's argument is directed toward)
    A metaethical view whose conclusion is reached in part by establishing that normative properties are not natural properties
    noncognitivism(contrasted with error theory)
    The view that moral judgments lack truth value because they are not assertions at all

    Connections

    2 topics

    Skepticism1 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    Moral skeptics can criticize any moral belief or theory without offering a posit...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    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