AbstractWhy would we argue about taste, norms or morality when we know that these topics are relative to taste preferences, systems of norms or values to which we are committed? Yet, disagreements over these topics are common in our evaluative discourses. I will claim that the motives to discuss rely on our attitudes towards the standard held by the speakers in each domain of discourse, relating different attitudes to different motives -mainly, conviction and correction. These notions of attitudes and motives will allow me to claim that different domains of evaluative discourse have a different distribution of disagreements driven by them
This paper argues for contextualism about predicates of personal taste and evaluative predicates in ...
In philosophy, there is much discussion about whether disagreements about taste, such as whether a c...
In this paper, I take issue with an idea that has emerged from recent relativist proposals, and, in ...
Why would we argue about taste, norms or morality when we know that these topics are relative to tas...
International audienceThe aim of this paper is to argue against a growing tendency to assimilate mor...
Expressivists have trouble accounting for disagreement. If ethical or other normative judgments are ...
In constructing semantic theories of normative and evaluative terms, philosophers have commonly depl...
Metaethical absolutism is the view that moral concepts have non-relative satisfaction conditions tha...
Truth and Norms: Normative Alethic Pluralism and Evaluative Disagreements engages three philosophica...
When two people disagree about matters of taste, neither is in the wrong: There is nothing contradic...
In social psychology, evaluative expressions have traditionally been understood in terms of their re...
A number of proposals have been recently made that converge towards the idea that the truth value of...
In social psychology, evaluative expressions have traditionally been understood in terms of their re...
This thesis engages with three topics and the relationships between them: (i) the phenomenon of disa...
According to contextualist and other content-relativist views in metaethics, different speakers use ...
This paper argues for contextualism about predicates of personal taste and evaluative predicates in ...
In philosophy, there is much discussion about whether disagreements about taste, such as whether a c...
In this paper, I take issue with an idea that has emerged from recent relativist proposals, and, in ...
Why would we argue about taste, norms or morality when we know that these topics are relative to tas...
International audienceThe aim of this paper is to argue against a growing tendency to assimilate mor...
Expressivists have trouble accounting for disagreement. If ethical or other normative judgments are ...
In constructing semantic theories of normative and evaluative terms, philosophers have commonly depl...
Metaethical absolutism is the view that moral concepts have non-relative satisfaction conditions tha...
Truth and Norms: Normative Alethic Pluralism and Evaluative Disagreements engages three philosophica...
When two people disagree about matters of taste, neither is in the wrong: There is nothing contradic...
In social psychology, evaluative expressions have traditionally been understood in terms of their re...
A number of proposals have been recently made that converge towards the idea that the truth value of...
In social psychology, evaluative expressions have traditionally been understood in terms of their re...
This thesis engages with three topics and the relationships between them: (i) the phenomenon of disa...
According to contextualist and other content-relativist views in metaethics, different speakers use ...
This paper argues for contextualism about predicates of personal taste and evaluative predicates in ...
In philosophy, there is much discussion about whether disagreements about taste, such as whether a c...
In this paper, I take issue with an idea that has emerged from recent relativist proposals, and, in ...