Understanding Evolutionary Debunking Arguments
Author Information
Author(s): Guy Kahane
Primary Institution: University of Oxford
Hypothesis
Do evolutionary debunking arguments undermine the justification of our evaluative beliefs?
Conclusion
Evolutionary debunking arguments challenge the justification of our evaluative beliefs by suggesting that their origins do not track truth.
Supporting Evidence
- EDAs suggest that our evaluative beliefs may not be justified if they are shaped by evolutionary processes.
- Arguments against the objectivity of moral beliefs are increasingly prevalent in philosophical discussions.
- Debunking arguments can show that certain beliefs are unjustified without proving that the beliefs themselves are false.
Takeaway
This study looks at how our beliefs about right and wrong might be influenced by evolution, and whether that means we can't trust those beliefs.
Methodology
The paper analyzes various forms of evolutionary debunking arguments and their implications for normative ethics.
Potential Biases
The study may overlook the influence of cultural and historical factors on evaluative beliefs.
Limitations
The arguments may not apply universally to all evaluative beliefs, and the empirical claims require further substantiation.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website