engleski

Normative reason and robust objectivity: Revisting evolutionary considerations

The common assumption of evolutionary debunking arguments plausibly involves the idea that some evolutionary story can be adduced that explains why many of our deeply held normative judgments came about and what the mechanisms for their retention are. Derek Parfit, in the second volume of his On What Matters defends robust normative objectivism by challenging the plausibility of the common assumption that evolutionary accounts can provide explanations of the existence of normative judgments with particular contents. In this paper, I defend the common presupposition of the evolutionary debunking arguments against Parfit’s objections. In particular, I examine some recent accounts from evolutionary psychology and anthropology that can be used to explain important features of our normative judgments.

Parfit ; evolutionary debunking arguments ; meatethics ; antirealism

nije evidentirano