Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 21 views

    Shafer Landau Fundamentals5e Lectureppt Ch22

    Uploaded by

    Pro Gamer
    The document summarizes five skeptical arguments against the possibility of moral knowledge: 1) The argument from disagreement states that since rational people disagree on moral issues, moral beliefs cannot be justified. 2) The no certainty argument says that moral knowledge requires certainty, which is impossible. 3) The argument from authority claims that no one has the authority to determine morality. 4) The irrelevant influences argument asserts that moral beliefs are influenced by outside factors rather than justification. 5) Hume's argument is that moral claims are neither conceptual nor empirical truths, so moral knowledge is impossible. The conclusion is that while influential, the skeptical arguments are not as powerful as initially thought and skepticism should not be the default view on whether moral knowledge exists.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Shafer Landau Fundamentals5e Lectureppt Ch22

    Uploaded by

    Pro Gamer
    21 views11 pages
    The document summarizes five skeptical arguments against the possibility of moral knowledge: 1) The argument from disagreement states that since rational people disagree on moral issues, moral beliefs cannot be justified. 2) The no certainty argument says that moral knowledge requires certainty, which is impossible. 3) The argument from authority claims that no one has the authority to determine morality. 4) The irrelevant influences argument asserts that moral beliefs are influenced by outside factors rather than justification. 5) Hume's argument is that moral claims are neither conceptual nor empirical truths, so moral knowledge is impossible. The conclusion is that while influential, the skeptical arguments are not as powerful as initially thought and skepticism should not be the default view on whether moral knowledge exists.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document summarizes five skeptical arguments against the possibility of moral knowledge: 1) The argument from disagreement states that since rational people disagree on moral issues, moral beliefs cannot be justified. 2) The no certainty argument says that moral knowledge requires certainty, which is impossible. 3) The argument from authority claims that no one has the authority to determine morality. 4) The irrelevant influences argument asserts that moral beliefs are influenced by outside factors rather than justification. 5) Hume's argument is that moral claims are neither conceptual nor empirical truths, so moral knowledge is impossible. The conclusion is that while influential, the skeptical arguments are not as powerful as initially thought and skepticism should not be the default view on whether moral knowledge exists.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    21 views11 pages

    Shafer Landau Fundamentals5e Lectureppt Ch22

    Uploaded by

    Pro Gamer
    The document summarizes five skeptical arguments against the possibility of moral knowledge: 1) The argument from disagreement states that since rational people disagree on moral issues, moral beliefs cannot be justified. 2) The no certainty argument says that moral knowledge requires certainty, which is impossible. 3) The argument from authority claims that no one has the authority to determine morality. 4) The irrelevant influences argument asserts that moral beliefs are influenced by outside factors rather than justification. 5) Hume's argument is that moral claims are neither conceptual nor empirical truths, so moral knowledge is impossible. The conclusion is that while influential, the skeptical arguments are not as powerful as initially thought and skepticism should not be the default view on whether moral knowledge exists.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 11

    Chapter 22:

    Is Moral Knowledge Possible? Five Skeptical Arguments

    © 2021
    Is Moral Knowledge Possible?
    Moral skepticism:
    The view that we cannot have moral knowledge

    The skeptic argues that our moral beliefs are never


    justified, and so we cannot have moral knowledge.

    © 2021
    The Skeptical Argument from
    Disagreement
     1. If well-informed, rational people persistently
    disagree about some claim, then we are not
    justified in believing that claim.
    2. Well-informed, rational people persistently
    disagree about all moral claims.
    3. Therefore, we are not justified in believing any
    moral claims.

    © 2021
    The No Certainty Argument
    1. You know that a claim is true only if you are
    certain of its truth.
    2. You can’t be certain that any moral claim is
    true.
    3. Therefore, moral knowledge is impossible.

    © 2021
    The Argument from Authority
    “Who’s to say?”
    1. We have moral knowledge only if we have the
    authority to determine what is moral or immoral.
    2. No one has that authority.
    3. Therefore, no one has moral knowledge.

    © 2021
    The Irrelevant Influences Argument
    1. If you hold your moral beliefs just because your
    parents or culture or evolution have influenced
    you to do so, then your moral beliefs are not
    justified.
    2. Everyone holds their moral beliefs just because
    of such influences.
    3. Therefore, no one’s moral beliefs are justified.

    © 2021
    Hume’s Argument
    1. We can know only two sorts of claims:
    conceptual truths or empirical truths.
    2. Moral claims are not conceptual truths.
    3. Moral claims are not empirical truths.
    4. Therefore, we can have no moral knowledge.

    © 2021
    Conceptual Truth
    A truth that has these three essential features:

    1. It is a necessary truth—it cannot be false

    2. It is true just in virtue of its meaning

    3. It can be known just by understanding it

    © 2021
    Conceptual Truth (2)

    Examples of conceptual truths:


    • Squares have four sides
    • All integers are even or odd
    • Bachelors are unmarried males

    © 2021
    Empirical Truth
    Empirical truths are known only by relying on
    evidence from our five senses

    Examples:
    • I live in a house that was built in 1964
    • It was raining in London on June 25, 2007
    • The Pacific Ocean is larger than the Atlantic
    • David Hume never married

    © 2021
    Conclusion
    The skeptical arguments are not as powerful as
    many have thought.
    The upshot is that the skeptical position should not
    be regarded as the default view.

    Discussion:
    Do we have moral knowledge?

    © 2021

    You might also like