EMPIRICAL ETHICS AND ITS ALLEGED META-ETHICAL FALLACIES
This paper analyses the concept of empirical ethics as well as three meta-ethical fallacies that empirical ethics is said to face: the is-ought problem, the naturalistic fallacy and violation of the fact-value distinction. Moreover, it answers the question of whether empirical ethics (necessarily) c...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Contributors: | |
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
Published: |
2009
|
In: |
Bioethics
Year: 2009, Volume: 23, Issue: 4, Pages: 193-201 |
Further subjects: | B
empirical ethics
B fact-value distinction B Naturalistic Fallacy B Is-ought problem |
Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
Summary: | This paper analyses the concept of empirical ethics as well as three meta-ethical fallacies that empirical ethics is said to face: the is-ought problem, the naturalistic fallacy and violation of the fact-value distinction. Moreover, it answers the question of whether empirical ethics (necessarily) commits these three basic meta-ethical fallacies. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1467-8519 |
Contains: | Enthalten in: Bioethics
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01710.x |