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
    The open question argument is no longer taken as decisive — Carmelics
    Home/Truth & Knowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Naturalist ethical theories gained prominence towards the end of the 20th century

    The open question argument is no longer taken as decisive

    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

    3 topics

    Virtue Ethics1 linkedNatural Theology1 linked

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Truth & Knowledge
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Moral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    A majority of philosophers do not want to admit non-natural entities into their ...Many philosophers judge that non-cognitivist and anti-realist theories cannot do...Naturalist ethical theories gained prominence towards the end of the 20th centur...

    Similar

    The open question argument is not decisive against naturalism82%The open question argument is simply an instance of the paradox of ana...79%The best responses to the open-question objection are similar to famil...77%The open question argument implausibly assumes that any correct defini...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: moral-epistemology-a-priori
    View source passageHide passage
    While hugely influential, Moore’s open question argument is far from unassailable. One influential response points out that it implausibly assumes any correct definition or analysis must be obvious. According to this response, the open question argument implausibly assumes the correct response to the paradox of analysis is to deny that any analysis could be both correct and informative (see entry on analysis). So, the open question argument is no longer taken as decisive. In addition, a majori

    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