Expressivism and moral argumentation.

Familiar semantics for terms like 'because' appeal to cause or ground, but according to expressivists moral claims cannot enter into such relations. This calls into question whether expressivists can account for moral explanation. I argue that moral expressivists should also be expressivists about e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophical Quarterly Vol. 75; no. 3; pp. 1142 - 1164
Autor principal: Schloeder, Julian J
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Oxford University Press / USA Jul2025
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=186062037&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 186062037
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318094
        PHQ
      jtl: Philosophical Quarterly
      issn: 00318094
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jul2025
      vid: 75
      iid: 3
      pid: 622
      pub: Oxford University Press / USA
    artinfo:
      ui:
        186062037
        10.1093/pq/pqae055
      ppf: 1142
      ppct: 22
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 443KB
      tig:
        atl: Expressivism and moral argumentation.
      aug:
        au: Schloeder, Julian J
        affil: University of Connecticut, USA
      su:
        Expressivism (Ethics)
        Semantics
        Philosophical research
        Metaethics
        Realism
      sug:
        subj:
          Expressivism (Ethics)
          Semantics
          Philosophical research
          Metaethics
          Realism
      keyword:
        explanation
        expressivism
        inferentialism
        meta-ethics
        moral argumentation
      ab: Familiar semantics for terms like 'because' appeal to cause or ground, but according to expressivists moral claims cannot enter into such relations. This calls into question whether expressivists can account for moral explanation. I argue that moral expressivists should also be expressivists about explanation. That is, claims like 'A because B' are used to express an attitude, namely that one endorses inferring A from B to be suitable for coming to believe A. This allows expressivists to give due to the asymmetric explanatory commitments of different ethical views. Moreover, the account identifies and explains the nature of moral argumentative discourse as proceeding by identifying similarities and adducing distinctions.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: © 2019 Scots Philosophical Association and the University of St. Andrews.
      item: Philosophical Quarterly
      holder: Oxford University Press / USA
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2025
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N