You are not currently logged in. Please create an account or sign in to view the full course.
6. Moral Disagreement
About this Lecture
In this module, we think about one of the major weaknesses of anti-realism – its apparent inability to explain moral disagreements. As we move through the module, we think how proponents of each of the different ‘flavours’ of anti-realists might respond to this issue.
In this course, Dr Luke Elson (University of Reading) explores what it means to be a moral anti-realist. We begin in the first module by thinking about what moral anti-realism actually is. After that, in the second module, we outline four reasons why someone might be an anti-realist. In the following three modules, we think about three anti-realist positions: first, A. J. Ayer’s theory of emotivism; second, R. M. Hare’s theory of prescriptivism; and third, J. L. Mackie’s Error Theory. In the sixth and seventh modules, we think about two of the major weaknesses of anti-realism: first, its inability to explain moral disagreements; and second, its inability to explain moral progress. Finally, in the eighth module, we think about the extent to which moral anti-realism leads to nihilism. And in that case, why be moral at all?
Luke Elson is a Lecturer in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Reading. His research interests include ethics, reasons and rationality, especially when they involve vagueness.
Cite this Lecture
Elson, L. (2019, February 27). Metaethics: Moral Anti-Realism - Moral Disagreement [Video]. MASSOLIT. https://www.massolit.io/courses/metaethics-moral-non-realism/moral-disagreement
Elson, Luke. "Metaethics: Moral Anti-Realism – Moral Disagreement." MASSOLIT, uploaded by MASSOLIT, 27 Feb 2019, https://www.massolit.io/courses/metaethics-moral-non-realism/moral-disagreement