Euthyphro and Moral Realism: A Reply to Harrison
Gerald Harrison identifies two Euthyphro-related concerns for divine command theories and makes the case that to the extent that these concerns make trouble for divine command theories they also make trouble for non-naturalistic moral realism and naturalistic moral realism (call this the parity thes...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Contributors: | |
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
Springer Netherlands
[2016]
|
In: |
Sophia
Year: 2016, Volume: 55, Issue: 3, Pages: 437-449 |
IxTheo Classification: | NBC Doctrine of God NCA Ethics VA Philosophy |
Further subjects: | B
Moral Realism
B Divine Command B Harrison B Euthyphro |
Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
Summary: | Gerald Harrison identifies two Euthyphro-related concerns for divine command theories and makes the case that to the extent that these concerns make trouble for divine command theories they also make trouble for non-naturalistic moral realism and naturalistic moral realism (call this the parity thesis). He also offers responses to the two concerns on behalf of divine command theorists. I show here that the parity thesis does not hold for the most commonly discussed version of divine command theory. I further argue that his responses to the two concerns fail. Finally, I draw on some of Harrisons ideas to identify an advantage that non-naturalistic moral realism has over divine command theories and naturalistic moral realism. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1873-930X |
Reference: | Kritik in "Divine Command Theory and Horrendous Deeds (2018)"
|
Contains: | Enthalten in: Sophia
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s11841-016-0545-x |