(with Daniel Nolan and Caroline West) “Moral Fictionalism versus the rest,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 83 (2005), 307–330.

doi:10.1080/00048400500191917

 download pdf

In this paper we introduce a distinct meta-ethical position, fictionalism about morality. We clarify and defend the position, showing that it is a way to save the “moral phenomena” while agreeing that there is no genuine objective prescriptivity to be described by moral terms. In particular, we distiguish moral fictionalism from moral quasi-realism, and we show that fictionalism many all of the virtues of quasi-realism but few of the vices.


Do you like this, or do you have a comment? Then please  share or reply on Twitter, or  email me.


← Multiple Conclusions | Writing Archive | Minimalists about Truth can (and should) be Epistemicists, and it helps if they are revision theorists too →

about

I’m Greg Restall, and this is my personal website. I teach philosophy and logic as Professor of Philosophy at the University of Melbourne. ¶ Start at the home page of this site—a compendium of recent additions around here—and go from there to learn more about who I am and what I do. ¶ This is my personal site on the web. Nothing here is in any way endorsed by the University of Melbourne.

elsewhere

subscribe

To receive updates from this site, you can subscribe to the  RSS feed of all updates to the site in an RSS feed reader, or follow me on Twitter at  @consequently, where I’ll update you if anything is posted.

search