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
    Street's evolutionary debunking argument against moral re... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Rejecting metaphysical naturalism provides a viable path for moral realists to solve the evolutionary debunking problem

    Street's evolutionary debunking argument against moral realism depends not on evolution alone but on the conjunction of evolution and metaphysical naturalism

    Natural TheologySkepticism
    ?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

    SkepticismNatural Theology

    Connections

    1 topic

    Modality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    A guided evolutionary process is not subject to the same debunking challenge as ...If metaphysical naturalism is false, the evolutionary process need not be unguid...Rejecting metaphysical naturalism provides a viable path for moral realists to s...

    Similar

    The evolutionary debunking argument undermines moral realism90%Rejecting metaphysical naturalism provides a viable path for moral rea...89%Moral realism is undermined by evolutionary debunking arguments87%The evolutionary debunking argument constitutes an attack on the exist...85%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: moral-arguments-god
    View source passageHide passage
    Street’s argument has also been challenged by such critics as Russ Shafer-Landau (2012). However, her argument, and similar arguments, have been acknowledged by some moral realists, such as David Enoch (2011) and Erik Wielenberg (2014) to pose a significant problem for their view. Enoch, for example, even though he offers a response to Street’s argument, evidently has some worries about the strength of his reply. Wielenberg, to avoid the criticism that in a non-theistic universe it would be extr

    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