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...
| Published in: | Sophia |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Contributors: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Springer Netherlands
[2016]
|
| In: |
Sophia
|
| 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 |