According to test of explanatory necessity, the appropriate way to test whether there are moral facts is to see whether we need to suppose the existence of moral facts anywhere in our best causal explanations. Some philosophers think this is a good test of whether there are moral facts, and think that moral facts pass the test. Others agree that this is a good test, but think that moral facts fail it. Still other philosophers think that moral facts fail this test, but that it is a misguided test.

In this paper, I discuss Nicholas Sturgeon’s view as an example…

Aleyna Dogan

philosophy with psychology and tech

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store