Despite having occupied a peripheral position in contemporary metaethics, moral nonnaturalism has recently experienced a revival of sorts. But what is moral nonnaturalism? And what is there to be said in favor of it? In this article, I address these two questions. In the first place, I offer an account of what moral nonnaturalism is. According to the view I propose, nonnaturalism is better viewed not as a position, but as a theoretical stance. And, second, I critically engage with three (...) recent arguments for moral nonnaturalism offered by Russ Shafer-Landau, Kit Fine, and Jean Hampton, respectively. (shrink)

"A third of the papers in this volume originated at the 1987 Spindel Conference ... at Memphis State University"--Pref.

In his recent book, The Moral Problem , Michael Smith presents a number of arguments designed to expose the difficulties with so-called 'extcrnalist' theories of motivation. This essay endeavors to defend externalism from Smith's attacks. I attempt three tasks in the essay. First, I try to clarify and reformulate Smith's distinction between internalism and externalism. Second, I formulate two of Smith's arguments- what I call the 'reliability argument' and 'the rationalist argument' -and attempt to show that these arguments fail to (...) damage externalism. Third, I undertake to expose and question some of the motivations that drive internalism. (shrink)

Citizenship education is being formally introduced into schools in England as a matter of national policy for the first time. This article offers a critical evaluation of the report of the Advisory Group on Education for Citizenship and the Teaching of Democracy in Schools which was chaired by Professor Bernard Crick, and which has been influential in shaping current educational policy in relation to these matters. An assessment is also offered of the challenges and prospects which confront citizenship education in (...) England in the light of these developments. (shrink)

I draw attention to how one of Donald Davidson’s arguments against the claim that others have an alternative conceptual scheme does not look compatible with his rejection of analytic truths – how his rejection of the third dogma of empiricism depends on accepting the first. The appendix contests Davidson’s approach to organizing the Pacific Ocean.

This article explores the integrity of the discourse in the Anglican eucharistic tradition by considering the philosophical assumptions that underlie eucharistic theology. It argues that where the conversation of the Anglican eucharistic tradition is open and unfinished then the integrity of the discourse is facilitated as opposed to the conversations of party positions and particular interests which suggest exclusive versions of truth. The conversation or dialogue of Anglican eucharistic theology is seen to be enhanced through the consideration of the philosophical (...) assumptions of realism and nominalism to both the moderate and immoderate degrees that underpin eucharistic theology as a state of affairs. The insights of contemporary philosophers are used as a way of conceptualising the discourse of the Anglican eucharistic tradition and a model of Anglican eucharistic theology is suggested as a means of facilitating the integrity of the discourse through the recognition of multiformity in the tradition and by distancing the discourse from the hermeneutic idealism of particular interest. (shrink)

This is a two page handout, briefly summarizing late nineteenth and early twentieth century philosopher Henry Sidgwick's objections to giving all citizens a right to as much equal freedom as possible. H.L.A. Hart, who uses the material in a notable paper, also figures.

Kant thought that one should never lie. Modern philosophers disagree, admitting its acceptability in various situations. I argue that one would have to admit it in many more.

This paper responds to Thomas Kelly and Sarah McGrath’s worry that there can be evil reflective equilibrium. I propose that some of John Rawls’s restrictions on moral judgments we can enter into the procedure serve to protect against evil reflective equilibrium.

This paper contains my attempt to pastiche the Lacanian philosopher and social theorist Renata Salecl. The pastiche focuses on the effects of coronavirus on liberal societies, the invasion of Ukraine, and offers a definition which I think is of interest to analytic philosophy.

It is tempting to represent anthropology at home versus anthropology in exotic places like so: “Whereas the latter is obviously legitimate and of interest to the discipline, the former is a borderline phenomenon at best and no department could function with just it. It is probably parasitic.” This paper offers a deconstruction of this portrait, but not a spectacular one, in which anthropology at home is presented as essential for accountability.

In this paper, I present two puzzles arising from J.M. Coetzee’s novel Elizabeth Costello, a fiction which is closely connected to analytic philosophy.

This paper considers two explanations for why the main character of Flora Nwapa’s novel One is Enough does not answer the question of how many times her mother-in-law has visited. One of these is a variation on the surprise exam paradox.

I anticipate someone who dismisses Sophocles as mere literary craftsperson of high skill, arguing that such craftspeople turn up generationally and that the credit should go to the mythmakers.

In Nwapa’s novel, Dora and Rose are both confronted with the rituals of Tunde, but engage with them in different ways. I attempt a somewhat pained contrast: Dora’s way is closer to that of the functionalist participant observer, whereas Rose’s way is closer to that of earlier armchair anthropologists who sought the origins of rituals. I also note a puzzle to do with literary realism.

This paper proposes that there is common ground between H.J. Rose’s A Handbook of Greek Mythology and Robert Graves’s The Greek Myths, in that both seem to think that it is a bad idea to meet a certain demand: to provide a handbook that is reliable, easy to consult, and suitable for students of certain literary tastes.

Why does Derek Parfit, a philosopher very much associated with the University of Oxford, use pictures of St. Petersburg on the covers of volumes of On What Matters? Perhaps it is because he regards his agony argument as like something from Russian literature. But I can envisage a response to the argument from such literature.

This paper offers a solution to Laura Valentini’s paradox of ideal theory. A reason for idealizing assumptions is because otherwise the theory would be too complicated to be action guiding.

A researcher at the Yale Modernism Lab, Elyse Graham, raises the question of why the early twentieth century literary review The Egoist had such troubling selling, despite its stellar contributors. She puts the blame on regulars Dora Marsden and Richard Aldington. I offer an alternative hypothesis.

The paradox of an island, we are told, is at once to be isolated from and open to the rest of the world. It seems the paradox is easily solved by clarifying isolated and open to the rest of the world.

I distinguish two senses of the word “offer.” I do so within a brief pastiche, which I put down to the influence of the European Union.

I make some proposals regarding which paradoxes Dr. Johnson was referring to in a preface.

I consider a puzzle that greatly preoccupies some people and mildly preoccupies others, while being of no interest to some at all: “How did those people get into an elite university?” Problems with writing faux Japanese fiction provide one explanation. Once skilled literary craftspeople have failed, one turns to others.

Do we learn anything from social anthropology done in more familiar settings, such as England? In this paper, I draw attention to something I learnt from Frances Oxford’s commentary on Elmdon: a surprising combination. I also propose a solution based on a conception of labour and inheritance rights.

This is a brief summary of 18 well-known objections to utilitarianism. It is meant to be able to function as a 2 page handout, so the reference list is limited to objectors.

This document presents some notes on Rousseau's claim that "In the state of nature... I recognize as belonging to others only what is of no use to me. ".

Aristotle’s account of virtues follows the same line of argument found in his account of the good. He relies on his metaphysical theory of essence as form and function, and on his psychological theory of human function as rational agency. He uses these theories to organise, explain, defend, and modify common beliefs. In doing so, he shows that his ethical theory is not purely dialectical, but also strong dialectic.

This chapter discusses some of the central Aristotelian doctrines founded on dialectical argument. It focuses on the Topics and Categories, which deal at length with some of the central problems classified as ‘logical’ as opposed to physical or ethical. In the Topics, Aristotle shows how to argue about the four predicables: coincident, proprium, genus, and definition. The categories or ‘kinds of predicates’ are introduced as a tenfold division of each of the four predicables, the four possible types of properties predicted (...) in a dialectical proposition or discussed in a dialectical problem. The distinctions underlying this tenfold division are presented at greater length in the Categories. (shrink)

The Posterior Analytics describes the structure of a science and of the content of scientific propositions. Aristotle sees the weaknesses observed in his methods, and his views on justification support and explain some of his demands on scientific knowledge. However, these same views seem to imply demands that he cannot meet within any plausible conception of justification.