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
    Moore's account of a priori moral knowledge is intuitioni... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Moore's account of a priori moral knowledge is intuitionist, not rationalist

    Moral Responsibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Moore holds that fundamental moral principles are self-evident and require no reasons or prior reasoning to justify them
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kant holds that moral knowledge results from careful transcendental and deductive reasoning from a fundamental moral principle
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An intuitionist account of a priori knowledge grounds belief in self-evident propositions that appear true, rather than in reasoning
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moore's method in Principia Ethica involves systematic conceptual analysis and rigorous argument to establish what 'good' means, not mere intuitive apprehension.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rationalist a priori knowledge does not require deductive derivation from a single principle, but can proceed through conceptual analysis, as in Leibniz.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If Moore's open question argument is a piece of sustained a priori reasoning about concepts, his method is rationalist in structure even if his conclusions are non-naturalist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Sidgwick, whom Moore explicitly builds upon, employs rational intuitions as axioms within a broader systematic framework of practical reason, blurring the intuitionist-rationalist divide.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moore's insistence that 'good' is a sui generis non-natural property knowable through intellectual perception places him closer to rationalist non-naturalists like Price than to Hutcheson's intuitionism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism1 linked

    Related

    An intuitionist account of a priori knowledge grounds belief in self-evident pro...If Moore's open question argument is a piece of sustained a priori reasoning abo...Kant holds that moral knowledge results from careful transcendental and deductiv...Moore holds that fundamental moral principles are self-evident and require no re...
    +4 moreShow less
    Moore's insistence that 'good' is a sui generis non-natural property knowable th...Moore's method in Principia Ethica involves systematic conceptual analysis and r...

    Similar

    An intuitionist account of a priori knowledge grounds belief in self-e...84%Moral intuition is essential to arriving at moral knowledge83%Moral intuitionists maintain that moral facts are non-natural facts82%Russell's account classifies a proposition as a priori justifiable onl...81%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-epistemology-a-priori
    View source passageHide passage
    Contrasting Moore’s view with Kant’s might be helpful. Kant viewed moral knowledge as fundamentally a priori in the sense that moral knowledge must be the result of careful reasoning (first transcendental, then deductive); one could discover through reason the fundamental moral principle, and then deduce from that principle more specific moral duties. Moore, on the other hand, explicitly rules out reasoning to fundamental moral principles; since these principles are self-evident, Moore denies th
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Rationalist a priori knowledge does not require deductive derivation from a sing...
    Sidgwick, whom Moore explicitly builds upon, employs rational intuitions as axio...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit