Ruse's Darwinian meta-ethics: A critique [Book Review]

Biology and Philosophy 8 (4):423-439 (1993)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Michael Ruse, in Taking Darwin Seriously seeks to establish that taking Darwin seriously requires us to treat morality as subjective and naturalistic. I argue that, if morality is not objective, then we have no good reason for being moral if we can avoid detection and punishment. As a consequence, we will only continue to behave morally as long as we remain ignorant of Ruse''s theory, that is, as long as the cat is not let out of the bag. Ruse offers a number of arguments to show that his theory can overcome such problems. I argue that they all fail. Ruse also argues that he can offer a naturalistic account of ethics which steps around the naturalistic fallacy and avoids the confusion of reasons with causes. His principal argument for this view is an analogy between spiritualism and morality. I argue that this analogy fails.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,343

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
106 (#206,276)

6 months
3 (#1,061,821)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

The miracle of theism: arguments for and against the existence of God.J. L. Mackie - 1982 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Bernard Williams.
The Idea of a Social Science.Peter Winch - 1959 - Les Etudes Philosophiques 14 (2):247-248.
The Miracle of Theism.John Leslie Mackie - 1982 - Philosophy 58 (225):414-416.

View all 14 references / Add more references