Abstract
AbstractA core commitment of meta-ethical expressivism is that ordinary descriptive judgements are representational states, while normative judgements are non-representational directive states. Traditionally, this commitment has been understood as a psychological thesis about the nature of normative judgements, as the view that normative judgements consist in certain sorts of conative propositional attitudes. This paper’s aim is to challenge this reading and to show that changing our view on how this commitment is to be understood opens up space for attractive forms of expressivism. The paper argues this by example: by presenting one of the possible expressivist views that can be developed on this reading and by arguing that this view has distinctive advantages over forms of expressivism that endorse the traditional interpretation of expressivism.
Funder
Frankfurt School of Finance & Management gGmbH
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference65 articles.
1. Baker, D., & Woods, J. (2015). How expressivists can and should explain inconsistency. Ethics, 125(2), 391–424. https://doi.org/10.1086/678371
2. Båve, A. (2013). Compositional semantics for expressivists. The Philosophical Quarterly, 63(253), 633–659.
3. Blackburn, S. (1993). Attitudes and contents. In Essays in quasi-realism (pp. 182–197). Oxford University Press.
4. Blackburn, S. (1998). Ruling Passions. Oxford University Press.
5. Block, N. (1986). Advertisement for a semantics for psychology. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 10, 615–678.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Relaxed realism and normative belief: A functionalist account;The Philosophical Quarterly;2024-07-19
2. The Muddled Moral Mind;The Journal of Value Inquiry;2024-06-01