tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5796853600782647712.post3748019767093010130..comments2012-01-23T09:28:10.615-08:00Comments on Moral Facts: A THEORY OF MORAL INTUITION by Christopher EddyChris Eddyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16325317094775664324noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5796853600782647712.post-35051474785739243822012-01-23T09:28:10.615-08:002012-01-23T09:28:10.615-08:00Dear Murali,
Thank you very much for your questio...Dear Murali,<br /><br />Thank you very much for your question.<br /><br />In the concluding section of my paper I refer to Ayer's emotivistic intuitions about what prescriptive language ("good", "ought",etc) implies, i.e., that it seeks to "stimulate action",- a view which has gained almost universal acceptance as self-evidently true. I then point out that "seeking 'to stimulate action' entails seeking consent, because acting entails intending which in trun entails consenting, so, if you want to stimulate action, the only way to do it is to appeal to the agent's consent by reasoning or other forms of inducement." If that is so, then everyone must behave as if it's so, otherwise the language-game of prescribing simply wouldn't work; but that game does work, so it must be self-evident to everyone, - even though they may never have made it explicit to themselves, - that prescriptive language does involve an appeal for consent and an acknowledgement of the responsibility thereby incurred to supply reasons for consenting if asked to do so.<br /><br /><br /><br />Regards, Chris.Chris Eddyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16325317094775664324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5796853600782647712.post-9029965369568007852012-01-11T19:47:17.853-08:002012-01-11T19:47:17.853-08:00Hi Chris,interesting post. But I'm going to ha...Hi Chris,interesting post. But I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. Here's why. You say:<br /><br /><i>It strikes me as self-evident that anyone who proposes any course of action thereby implicitly intends to seek consent to it, and what makes it self-evident is that whoever proposes any course of action knows that, unless he somehow signals that his proposal is intended ironically, those who hear him will automatically assume that what he is doing is seeking consent for his proposal. He knows this just because he is a speaker, the user of a natural language: it is part of the interlocutory grammar which, like the grammar of sentences, every speaker applies "intuitively".</i><br /><br />It doesnt strike me as self evident. In fact the statement is so out there that it is going to require a lot more argument to back up.Muralihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08036249483538443818noreply@blogger.com