dc.contributor.author | Duffy, Simon J | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2007-05-03T09:14:02Z | |
dc.date.available | 2007-05-03T09:14:02Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2001-06 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1842/1724 | |
dc.description.abstract | This thesis sets out an argument in defence of moral objectivism. It takes Mackie as the
critic of objectivism and it ends by proposing that the best defence of objectivism may
be found in what I shall call Kantian intuitionism, which brings together elements of the
intuitionism of Ross and a Kantian epistemology. The argument is fundamentally
transcendental in form and it proceeds by first setting out what we intuitively believe,
rejecting the sceptical attacks on those beliefs, and by then proposing a theory that can
legitimize what we already do believe.
Chapter One sets out our intuitive understanding of morality: (1) that morality is
cognitive, moral beliefs can be true or false; (2) that morality is real, we do not
construct it; (3) that morality is rational, we can learn about it by rational investigation;
and (4) that morality places us under an absolute constraint. The chapter ends by
clarifying the nature of that absolute demand and by arguing that the critical idea within
morality is the idea of duty.
In Chapter Two Mackie’s sceptical attack on objectivism is examined. Four key
arguments are identified: (1) that moral beliefs are relative to bfferent agents; (2) that
morality is based upon on non-rational causes; (3) that the idea of moral properties or
entities is too queer to be sustainable; and (4) that moral objectivism involves queer
epistemological commitments. Essentially all of these arguments are shown to be
ambiguous; however it is proposed that Mackie has an underlying epistemological and
metaphysical theory, scientific empiricism, which is (a) hostile to objectivism and (b) a
theory that many find attractive for reasons that are independent of morality.
Chapter Three explores the nature of moral rationality and whether scientific
empiricism can use the idea of reflective equilibrium to offer a reasonable account of
moral rationality. It concludes that, while reflective equilibrium is a useful account of
moral rationality, it cannot be effectively reconciled with scientific empiricism. In order
to function effectively as a rational process, reflective equilibrium must be rationally
constrained by our moral judgements and our moral principles.
Chapter Four begins the process of exploring some alternative epistemologies and
argues that the only account that remains true to objectivism and the needs of reflective
equilibrium is the account of intuitionism proposed by Ross. However this account can
be developed further by drawing upon number of Kantian ideas and using them to
supplement Ross ’ s intuitionism.
So Chapter Five draws upon a number of Kant's ideas, most notably some key notions
from the Critique of Judgement. These ideas are: (1) that we possess a rational will that
is subject to the Moral law and determined by practical reason; (2) that we possess a
faculty of judgement which enables us to become aware of moral properties and (3) that
these two faculties together with the third faculty of thought can function to constitute
the moral understanding. Using these ideas the thesis explores whether they can serve to
explain how intuitions can be rational and how objectivism can be justified. | en |
dc.format.extent | 16038750 bytes | en |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | en |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.subject | Philosophy | en |
dc.subject | moral objectivism | en |
dc.subject.other | moral objectivism, Kantian intuitionism, Kantian epistemology, morality, empiricism | en |
dc.title | An Intuitionist Response to Moral Scepticism: A critique of Mackie's scepticism, and an alternative proposal combining Ross's intuitionism with a Kantian epistemology | en |
dc.type | Thesis or Dissertation | en |
dc.type.qualificationlevel | Doctoral | en |
dc.type.qualificationname | PhD Doctor of Philosophy | en |