Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T15:24:36.939Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 November 2018

Edited by
Neil Sinclair
Neil Sinclair
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
The Naturalistic Fallacy , pp. 265 - 281
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, R. 1973. “A Modified Divine Command Theory of Ethical Wrongness” reprinted in his The Virtue of Faith and Other Essays in Philosophical Theology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Adams, R. 1979. “Divine Command Metaethics Modified Again” reprinted in his The Virtue of Faith and Other Essays in Philosophical Theology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Adams, R. 1999. Finite and Infinite Goods: A Framework for Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Almeida, M. 2004. “Supervenience and Property-Identical Divine Command Theory” Religious Studies 40: 323–333.Google Scholar
Alston, W. 1989. “Some Suggestions for Divine Command Theories” reprinted in his Divine Nature and Human Language: Essays in Philosophical Theology. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Ambrose, A. & Lazerowitz, M., 1970. G.E. Moore: Essays in Retrospect. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Audi, R. 1973. “Intending” Journal of Philosophy 79: 387–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Audi, R. 2007. “Divine Command Morality and the Autonomy of Ethics” Faith and Philosophy 24: 121–143.Google Scholar
Ayer, A. J. 1946. Language, Truth and Logic. Second edition. London: Victor Gollancz.Google Scholar
Ayer, A. J.(ed.) 1959. Logical Positivism. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Baghramian, M. 2004. Relativism. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baghramian, M. & Carter, J. Adam 2015. “Relativism” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/relativism/.Google Scholar
Baldwin, T. 1990. G.E. Moore. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Baldwin, T.(ed.) 1993. G.E. Moore: Principia Ethica (Revised Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Baldwin, T. 2010. “The Open Question Argument” in Skorupski, J. (ed.) The Routledge Companion to Ethics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Baldwin, T. & Preti, C.. 2011. G. E. Moore: Early Philosophical Papers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Balfour, A. 1894. “Naturalism and Ethics” International Journal of Ethics 4(4): 414–429.Google Scholar
Barker, S. 2000. “Is Value Content a Component of Conventional Implicature?” Analysis 60(267): 268–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barry, M. 2018. “Constructivism” in McPherson, & Plunkett, 2018.Google Scholar
Benton, M.A. 2015. “Knowledge Norms” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://www.iep.utm.edu/kn-norms/#SH1d.Google Scholar
Bernecker, S. & Dretske, F. 2000. Knowledge: Readings in Contemporary Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blackburn, S. 1971. “Moral Realism” in Casey, J. (ed.) Morality and Moral Reasoning. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Blackburn, S. 1984. Spreading the Word. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blackburn, S. 1988. “Attitudes and Contents” Ethics 98: 501–517.Google Scholar
Blackburn, S. 1993. Essays in Quasi-Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blackburn, S. 1998. Ruling Passions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blackburn, S. 2009. “Analysis, Description and the A Priori” in Ravenscroft 2009.Google Scholar
Block, N. 1995. “On a Confusion about a Function of Consciousness” Behavioural and Brain Sciences 18: 227–287.Google Scholar
Blunt, Herbert W. 1895. “Philosophy and Naturalism” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 3(2): 43–51.Google Scholar
Boghossian, P. 2001. “How Are Objective Epistemic Reasons Possible?” Philosophical Studies 106(1): 1–40.Google Scholar
Boghossian, P. 2006. Fear of Knowledge: Against Relativism and Constructivism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Boisvert, D. 2008. “Expressive-Assertivism” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89(2): 169–203.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. 1904. “Critical Notice of Principia Ethica by George Edward Moore” Mind 13: 254–261.Google Scholar
Boyd, R. 1988. “How to Be a Moral Realist” in Sayre-McCord, G. (ed.) Essays on Moral Realism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Boyd, R. 2003. “Finite Beings, Finite Goods: The Semantics, Metaphysics and Ethics of Naturalist Consequentialism, Part I” Philosophical and Phenomenological Research 66: 505–553.Google Scholar
Bradley, F. H. 1876. Ethics. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bradley, F. H. 1883. Principles of Logic. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bradley, F. H. 1893. Appearance and Reality. London: Swann Sonnenschein.Google Scholar
Braddon-Mitchell, D. & Nola, R. 2009. “Introducing the Canberra Plan” in Braddon-Mitchell, & Nola, (eds.) Conceptual Analysis and Philosophical Naturalism. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brandt, R. 1979. A Theory of the Good and the Right. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Bratman, M. 1987/1999. Intentions, Plans and Practical Reason. Reprint Edition. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Brink, D. 1989. Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brink, D. 2001. “Realism, Naturalism and Moral Semantics” Social Philosophy and Policy 18(2): 154–176Google Scholar
Broad, C. D. 1930. Five Types of Ethical Theory. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Broad, C. D. 1942. “Certain Features in Moore’s Ethical Doctrines” in Schilpp, 1942: 41–68.Google Scholar
Broad, C. D. 1944. “Critical Notice of Julian Huxley’s Evolutionary Ethics” Mind 53: 344–367.Google Scholar
Brody, B. 1981. “Morality and Religion Reconsidered” in Helm, P. (ed.) Divine Commands and Morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, J. 1995. Charles Darwin: Voyaging. Volume I of a Biography. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Brown, J. 2002. Charles Darwin: The Power of Place. Volume II of a Biography. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Bukoski, M. 2016. “A Critique of Smith’s Constitutivism” Ethics 127: 116–46Google Scholar
Burge, T. 1979. “Individualism and the Mental” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 4(1): 73–122.Google Scholar
Burge, T. 1986. “Intellectual Norms and the Foundation of Mind” Journal of Philosophy 83: 697–720.Google Scholar
Burnyeat, M. & Frede, M. 1997. The Original Sceptics: A Controversy. London: Hackett.Google Scholar
Cambridge University Calendar, 1896.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. 1937. Philosophy and Logical Syntax. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. 1959. “The Elimination of Metaphysics through Logical Analysis of Language” in Ayer 1959. Originally published as “Überwindung der Metaphysik durch Logische Analyse der Sprache” Erkenntnis 2, 1932.Google Scholar
Carter, J. Adam. 2016. Metaepistemology and Relativism. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Carter, J. Adam 2017. “Epistemological Implications of Relativism” in Jenkins Ichikawa, J. (ed.) Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Contextualism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carter, J. Adam, Jarvis, B. & Rubin, K. 2013a. “Knowledge and the Value of Cognitive Ability” Synthese 190(17): 3715–3729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, J. Adam & Jarvis, B., & Rubin, K. 2013b. “Knowledge: Value on the Cheap” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91(2): 249–263.Google Scholar
Carter, J. Adam & Prichard, D. Forthcoming. “Inference to the Best Explanation and Epistemic Circularity” in McCain, K. & Poston, T. (eds.) Best Explanations: New Essays on Inference to the Best Explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chisholm, R. 1970. “The Structure of Intention” Journal of Philosophy 67: 633–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coons, C. 2012. “The Best Expression of Welfarism” in Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics 2: 206–234.Google Scholar
Cooper, J. M. (ed.) 1997. Plato: Complete Works. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Copp, D. 1995. Morality, Normativity, and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Copp, D. 2001. “Realist Expressivism – A Neglected Option for Moral Realism” Social Philosophy and Policy 18: 1–43.Google Scholar
Copp, D.(ed.) 2006. The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Copp, D. 2007. “Moral Naturalism and Three Grades of Normativity” in his Morality in a Natural World. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Copp, D. 2013. “Is Constructivism an Alternative to Moral Realism?” in Bagnoli, C. (ed.) Constructivism in Ethics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carson, R. 1962. Silent Spring. New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Cunningham, S. 1996. Philosophy and the Darwinian Legacy. Rochester: University of Rochester Press.Google Scholar
Curry, O. 2006. “Who’s Afraid of the Naturalistic Fallacy?” Evolutionary Psychology 4(1): 243–247.Google Scholar
Dancy, J. 1986. “Two Conceptions of Moral Realism” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supp. 60: 167–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancy, J. 2000. Practical Reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dancy, J. 2004. “On the Importance of Making Things Right” Ratio 17: 229–237.Google Scholar
Dancy, J. 2006. “What Do Reasons Do?” in Horgan, & Timmons, 2006.Google Scholar
Dancy, J. 2006b. “Nonnaturalism” in Copp, 2006.Google Scholar
Danielsson, S. & Olson, J. 2007. “Brentano and the Buck-Passers” Mind 116(463): 511–522.Google Scholar
Darwall, S. 2002. Welfare and Rational Care. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Darwall, S. 2003a. “How Should Ethics Relate to (the Rest of) Philosophy” Southern Journal of Philosophy 41: 1–20Google Scholar
Darwall, S. 2003b. “Moore, Normativity, and Intrinsic Value” Ethics 113(3): 468–489.Google Scholar
Darwall, S. 2007. “How Is Moorean Value Related to Reasons for Attitudes?” in Nuccetelli, & Seay, (eds.) 2007.Google Scholar
Darwall, S., Gibbard, A. & Railton, P.. 1992. “Toward Fin de Siècle Ethics: Some Trends” Philosophical Review 101: 115–189.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. 1871. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. 1874. The Descent of Man (Second Edition). London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Davies, M. 2009. “Two Purposes of Arguing and Two Epistemic Projects” in Ravenscroft, 2009.Google Scholar
Davis, W. 1984. “A Causal Theory of Intending” American Philosophical Quarterly 21: 43–54.Google Scholar
Desmond, A. 1997. Huxley, Evolution’s High Priest. London: Michael Joseph.Google Scholar
Dreier, J. 1996. “Expressivist Embeddings and Minimalist Truth” Philosophical Studies 83: 29–51.Google Scholar
Dreier, J. 2004. “Meta-Ethics and the Problem of Creeping Minimalism” Philosophical Perspectives 18: 23–44.Google Scholar
Dreier, J. 2006. “Negation for Expressivists: A Collection of Problems with a Suggestion for Their Solution” Oxford Studies in Metaethics 1: 217–234.Google Scholar
Dreier, J. 2015. “Explaining the Quasi-Real” in Oxford Studies in Metaethics 10: 273–298.Google Scholar
Driver, J. 2017. “Contingency and Constructivism” in Kirchin, S. (ed.) Reading Parfit: On What Matters. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dummett, M. 1993. Origins of Analytical Philosophy. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Durrant, R.G. 1970. “Identity of Properties and the Definition of ‘Good’” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 48(3): 360–361.Google Scholar
Elmer, D. 1970. “Has Anyone Committed the Naturalistic Fallacy?” The Southwestern Journal of Philosophy 1(1/2): 40–46.Google Scholar
Enoch, D. 2006. “Agency, Schmagency: Why Normativity Won’t Come from What Is Constitutive of Action” Philosophical Review 115(2): 169–98.Google Scholar
Enoch, D. 2009. “Can There Be a Global, Interesting, Coherent Constructivism about Practical Reason?” Philosophical Explorations 12: 319–39.Google Scholar
Enoch, D. 2011. Taking Morality Seriously: A Defense of Robust Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eriksson, J. 2009. “Homage to Hare: Ecumenicism and the Frege-Geach Problem” Ethics 120: 8–35.Google Scholar
Ewing, A.C. 1947. The Definition of Good. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Feldman, F. 1978. Introductory Ethics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Feldman, F. 2005. “The Open Question Argument: What It Isn’t; and What It Is” Philosophical Issues 15: 22–43.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, P. 1975. Against Method. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Fieser, J. (ed.) 2005. Early Responses to Hume, 2nd edn., Vol. 1: Early Responses to Hume’s Moral, Literary and Political Writings. Bristol: Thoemmes Continuum.Google Scholar
Finlay, S. 2014. Confusion of Tongues: A Theory of Normative Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, A. 2005. “Good, God, and the Open-Question Argument” Religious Studies 41: 335–341.Google Scholar
FitzPatrick, W. 2005. “The Practical Turn in Ethical Theory: Korsgaard’s Constructivism, Realism and the Nature of Normativity” Ethics 115(4): 651–91.Google Scholar
FitzPatrick, W. 2008. “Robust Ethical Realism, Non-Naturalism and Normativity” in Oxford Studies in Metaethics 3: 159–205.Google Scholar
FitzPatrick, W. 2011. “Ethical Non-Naturalism and Normative Properties” in Brady, M. (ed.) New Waves in Metaethics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
FitzPatrick, W. 2014. “Skepticism about Naturalizing Normativity: In Defense of Ethical Non-Naturalism” Res Philosophica 91(4): 559–88.Google Scholar
FitzPatrick, W. 2016. “Ontology for an Uncompromising Ethical Realism” Topoi Online First. DOI 10.1007/s11245-016–9443-7.Google Scholar
Fletcher, G. & Ridge, M. (eds). 2014. Having It Both Ways: Hybrid Theories and Modern Metaethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flew, A. 1986. David Hume: Philosopher of Moral Science. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Flock, G. 2015. “Moore and Hume on Cognitivism, Fact-Value Entanglement and Ought From Is.” http://www.academia.edu/16246990/Moore_and_Hume_on_Ought_From_Is.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. 1987. Psychosemantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Frankena, W. 1939. “The Naturalistic Fallacy” Mind 48(192): 464–477.Google Scholar
Frankena, W. 1942. “Obligation and Value in the Ethics of G.E. Moore” In Schilpp 1942: 91–110.Google Scholar
Frege, G. 1892. “Über Sinn und Bedeutung” in Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 100: 25–50. Translated as “On Sense and Reference” by M. Black in Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege, (ed.) and trans. P. Geach and M. Black. Oxford: Blackwell, third edition, 1980.Google Scholar
Garner, R.T. 1990. “On the Genuine Queerness of Moral Properties and Facts” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 68: 137–146.Google Scholar
Gibbard, A. 1990. Wise Choices, Apt Feelings: A Theory of Normative Judgement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gibbard, A. 2003. Thinking How to Live. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Geach, P. 1956. “Good and Evil” Analysis 17(2): 33–42.Google Scholar
Geach, P. 1965. “Assertion” The Philosophical Review 74(4): 449–465.Google Scholar
Gensler, H. 2016. Ethics and Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Glassen, P. 1959. “The Cognitivity of Moral Judgments” Mind 68(269): 57–72.Google Scholar
Greco, J. 2010. Achieving Knowledge: A Virtue-Theoretic Account of Epistemic Normativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guyer, P. 1992. The Cambridge Companion to Kant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hacking, I. 1982. “Language, Truth and Reason” in Hollis, M. and Lukes, S (eds.) Rationality and Relativism. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. 48–66.Google Scholar
Haddock, A., Millar, A. & Prichard, D. 2009. Epistemic Value. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haddock, A., Millar, A & Prichard, D. 2010. The Nature and Value of Knowledge: Three Investigations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haldane, J. & Wright, C. (eds.) 1993. Reality, Representation and Projection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hampton, J. 1998. The Authority of Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hancock, R. 1960. “The Refutation of Naturalism in Moore and Hare” Journal of Philosophy 57(10): 326–334.Google Scholar
Hare, R. M. 1952. The Language of Morals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hare, R. M. 1963. Freedom and Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harman, G. 1975. “Moral Relativism Defended” Philosophical Review 84(1): 3–22.Google Scholar
Harman, G. 1976. “Practical Reasoning” The Review of Metaphysics 29: 431–463.Google Scholar
Harman, G. 1977. The Nature of Morality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1651. Leviathan. London.Google Scholar
Horgan, T. & Tienson, J. 2002. “The Intentionality of Phenomenology and the Phenomenology of Intentionality” in Chalmers, D. (ed.) Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Horgan, T., Tienson, J. & Graham, G. 2004. “Phenomenal Intentionality and the Brain in a Vat” in Schantz, R. (ed.) The Externalist Challenge: New Studies in Cognition and Intentionality. Amsterdam: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Horgan, T. & Timmons, M. 1991. “New Wave Moral Realism Meets Moral Twin Earth” Journal of Philosophical Research 16: 447–465Google Scholar
Horgan, T. & Timmons, M. 1992. “Troubles for New Wave Moral Semantics: The ‘Open Question Argument’ Revived” Philosophical Papers 21(3): 153–175.Google Scholar
Horgan, T. & Timmons, M.(eds.) 2006. Metaethics after Moore. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Horgan, T. & Timmons, M. 2008. “What Can Moral Phenomenology Tell Us about Moral Objectivity?” Social Philosophy and Policy 25: 267–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horgan, T. & Timmons, M. 2010. “Mandelbaum on Moral Phenomenology and Moral Realism” in Verstegen, I. (ed.) Maurice Mandelbaum and American Critical Realism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Horgan, T. & Timmons, M. 2015. “Modest Quasi-Realism and the Problem of Deep Moral Error” in Johnson, R. and Smith, M. (eds.) Passions and Projections: Themes from the Philosophy of Simon Blackburn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Horgan, T. & Timmons, M. 2017. “Sentimentalist Moral-Perceptual Experience and Realist Pretensions: A Phenomenological Inquiry” in Steuber, K. & Debes, R. (eds.) Ethical Sentimentalism: New Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Howard, C. Forthcoming. “The Fundamentality of Fit” in Oxford Studies in Metaethics 14.Google Scholar
Hudson, W. 1964. “Hume on Is and Ought” The Philosophical Quarterly 14(6): 246–252. Reprinted in Hudson 1969.Google Scholar
Hudson, W. 1967. Ethical Intuitionism. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Hudson, W.(ed.) 1969. The Is-Ought Question. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hudson, W. 1969a. “Introduction” in Hudson, 1969.Google Scholar
Hudson, W. 1970. Modern Moral Philosophy. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Huemer, M. 2005. Ethical Intuitionism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hume, D. 1963 [1757]. “A Natural History of Religion” in Wollheim, R. (ed.) Hume on Religion. London: Fontana.Google Scholar
Hume, D. 1978 [1740]. A Treatise on Human Nature. Selby-Bigge, L. A & Nidditch, P. H. (eds.) 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, D. 1987. Essays, Moral Political and Literary, revised edition, (ed.) Miller, E. V., Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
Hurka, T. 2003. “Moore in the Middle” Ethics 113(3): 599–628.Google Scholar
Hurka, T. 2015. “Moore’s Moral Philosophy” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/moore-moral/.Google Scholar
Huxley, J. S. 1943. Evolutionary Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Huxley, T. H. 2009 [1893]. Evolution and Ethics. Edited with an Introduction by Ruse, M.. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, F. 1998. From Metaphysics to Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, F. 2003. “Cognitivism, A Priori Deduction, and Moore” Ethics 113(3): 557–575.Google Scholar
Jackson, F. 2009. “Reply to My Critics” in Ravenscroft 2009.Google Scholar
Jackson, F. 2012. “On Ethical Naturalism and the Philosophy of Language” in Nuccetelli, & Seay, 2012.Google Scholar
Jackson, F & Pettit, P. 1996. “Moral Functionalism, Supervenience and Reductionism” Philosophical Quarterly 46: 82–86.Google Scholar
Jackson, F., Pettit, P. & Smith, M. 2000. “Ethical Particularism and Patterns” in Hooker, B. & Little, M. O. (eds.) Moral Particularism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Joyce, R. 2001. The Myth of Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Joyce, R. 2006. The Evolution of Morality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. 1959. Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Kant, I. 2003. Critique of Pure Reason, trans. N. Kemp-Smith. Houndsmills: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1998) Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, trans & ed. Gregor, Mary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kaplan, D. 1979. “On the Logic of Demonstratives” Journal of Philosophical Logic 8(1): 81–98.Google Scholar
Kim, J. 1976. “Intention and Practical Inference” in Manninen, J. & Tuomela, R. (eds.) Essays on Explanation and Understanding. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Kim, J. 1993. “Postscripts on Supervenience” in Supervenience and Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kitcher, P. 1990. Kant’s Transcendental Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kohnke, C. 1991. The Rise of Neo-Kantianism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kolakowski, L. 1978. Main Currents of Marxism: Volume II The Golden Age. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kolnai, A. 1980. “The Ghost of the Naturalistic Fallacy” Philosophy 55: 5–16.Google Scholar
Kornblith, H. 2002. Knowledge and Its Place in Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Korsgaard, C. 1996. The Sources of Normativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Korsgaard, C. 2003. “Realism and Constructivism in 20th Century Moral Philosophy” in Philosophy in America at the Turn of the Century, APA Centennial Supplement, Journal of Philosophical Research: 302–326.Google Scholar
Korsgaard, C. 2009. Self-Constitution: Agency, Identity and Integrity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kusch, M. 1995. Psychologism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kripke, S. 1980. Naming and Necessity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kvanvig, J. 2003. The Value of Knowledge and the Pursuit of Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kvanvig, J. 2004. “Nozickian Epistemology and the Value of Knowledge” Philosophical Issues 14(1): 201–211.Google Scholar
LaFollette, H. (ed.) 2000. The Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Langford, C. 1942. “The Notion of Analysis in Moore’s Philosophy” in Schilpp, 1942.Google Scholar
Lear, L. 1997. Rachel Carson: Witness for Nature. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
Lenman, J. 2014. “Moral Naturalism” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/naturalism-moral/.Google Scholar
Levy, P. 1979. G.E. Moore and the Cambridge Apostles. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Levy, P. 2005. The Letters of Lytton Strachey. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. 1970. “How to Define Theoretical Terms” Journal of Philosophy 67(13): 427–446.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. 1989. “Dispositional Theories of Value” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supp. 63: 89–174.Google Scholar
Lewy, C. 1970. “G. E. Moore on the Naturalistic Fallacy” in Ambrose, & Lazerowitz, 1970: 292–303.Google Scholar
Littlejohn, C. Forthcoming. “Knowledge and Normativity” in Valaris, M. & Hetherington, S. (eds.) Knowledge in Contemporary Philosophy. Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Loeb, D. 1995. “Full-Information Theories of Individual Good” Social Theory and Practice 21: 1–30.Google Scholar
Lotze, H. 1897. Microcosmus, trans. Elizabeth Hamilton and E.E. Constance Jones. New York: Scribner’s.Google Scholar
Lovelock, J. E. 1979. Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mackie, J. L. 1977. Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Mackie, J. L. 1978. “The Law of the Jungle” Philosophy 53: 553–573.Google Scholar
Mackie, J. L. 1980. “Review of Sociobiology: Sense or Nonsense by Michael Ruse” Erkenntnis 15: 189–194.Google Scholar
MacFarlane, J. 2005. “The Assessment Sensitivity of Knowledge Attributions” Oxford Studies in Epistemology 1: 197–233.Google Scholar
MacFarlane, J. 2010. “Relativism and Knowledge Attributions” in Bernecker, S. & Pritchard, D. (eds.) Routledge Companion to Epistemology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
MacFarlane, J. 2014. Assessment Sensitivity: Relative Truth and Its Applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, A. C. 1959. “Hume on ‘Is’ and ‘Ought’” Philosophical Review 68(4): 451–468.Google Scholar
Mandelbaum, M. 1955. The Phenomenology of Moral Experience. Reprinted in 1969 by The Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
Marcus, R. B. 1963. “Modal Logics I: Modalities and Intensional Languages” Proceedings of the Boston Colloquium for the Philosophy of Science 1961/1962.Google Scholar
McCann, H. 1986. Change in View: Principles of Reasoning. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McCann, H. 1998. “Settled Objectives and Rational Constraints” in Works of Agency: On Human, Will, and Freedom. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
McGilvary, E. B. 1904. “Review of Principia Ethica by George Edward Moore” The Philosophical Review 13(3): 351–58.Google Scholar
McHugh, C. & Way, J. 2016. “Fittingness First” Ethics 126(3): 575–606.Google Scholar
McNaughton, D. 1988. Moral Vision. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
McPherson, T. & Plunkett, D. (eds.) 2018. The Routledge Handbook of Metaethics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1969, Essays on Ethics, Religion and Society (The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, vol. 10). Robson, J. M. (ed.) Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1974. A System of Logic, Rationcinative and Inductive, Books 1–3 (The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, vol. 7). Robson, J. M. (ed.) Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1974a. A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive, Books 4–6 (The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, vol. 8). Robson, J. M. (ed.) Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Miller, A. 2013. Contemporary Metaethics: An Introduction (2nd Edition). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Miller, C. 2009a. “Divine Will Theory: Desires or Intentions?” Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion 2: 185–207.Google Scholar
Miller, C. 2009b. “Divine Desire Theory and Obligation” in Nagasawa, Y. & Wielenberg, E. (eds.) New Waves in Philosophy of Religion. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Millikan, R. G. 1984. Language, Thought and Other Biological Categories. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Montefiore, A. 1966. “Facts, Values and Ideology” in Williams and Montefiore (eds.) British Analytic Philosophy. London: Routledge Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Moore, G.E. 1899. “The Nature of Judgment” Mind 8(30): 176–93.Google Scholar
Moore, G.E. 1903. “The Refutation of Idealism” Mind 12(48): 433–453.Google Scholar
Moore, G.E. 1912. Ethics. London: Butterworth.Google Scholar
Moore, G.E. 1922. “The Conception of Intrinsic Value” in his Philosophical Studies. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Moore, G.E. 1942. “A Reply to My Critics” in Schilpp 1942: 533–678.Google Scholar
Moore, G.E. 1993 [1903]. Principia Ethica (Revised Edition), Edited and with an Introduction by Thomas Baldwin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lloyd, Morgan. C. 1895. “Naturalism” The Monist 6(1): 76–90.Google Scholar
Murphy, J. 1982. Evolution, Morality, and the Meaning of Life. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Murphy, M. 1998. “Divine Command, Divine Will, and Moral Obligation” Faith and Philosophy 15: 3–27.Google Scholar
Murphy, M. 2002a. “A Trilemma for Divine Command Theory” Faith and Philosophy 19: 22–31Google Scholar
Murphy, M. 2002b. An Essay on Divine Authority. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, M. 2004. “Reply to Almeida” Religious Studies 40: 335–339.Google Scholar
Murphy, M. 2012a. “Theological Voluntarism” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/voluntarism-theological/.Google Scholar
Murphy, M. 2012b. “Restricted Theological Voluntarism” Philosophy Compass 7: 679–690.Google Scholar
Myers, C. S. 1901. “Naturalism and Idealism” The Philosophical Review 10(5): 463–76.Google Scholar
Myers, F. W. H. 1881. “George Elliot” The Century Magazine, November, 47.Google Scholar
Nagel, T. 1980. “The Limits of Objectivity” in McMurrin, S. (ed.) The Tanner Lectures on Human Values. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nagel, T. 1986. The View from Nowhere. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nowell-Smith, P. H. 1954. Ethics. New York: Philosophical Library.Google Scholar
Nozick, R. 1974. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Nuccetelli, S. & Seay, G. (eds.) 2007a. Themes from G.E. Moore: New Essays in Epistemology and Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nuccetelli, S & Seay, G. 2007b. “What’s Right with the Open Question Argument?” in Nuccetelli, & Seay, 2007a.Google Scholar
Nuccetelli, S & Seay, G.(eds.) 2012. Ethical Naturalism: Current Debates. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ogden, C. K. & Richards, I. A. 1923. The Meaning of Meaning. New York: Harcourt Brace & Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Olson, J. 2014. Moral Error Theory: History, Critique, Defence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Overvold, M. 1980. “Self-Interest and the Concept of Self-Sacrifice” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 10: 105–118.Google Scholar
Parfit, D. 2011. On What Matters. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pigden, C. 1987. “Two Dogmatists” Inquiry 30(1): 173–193Google Scholar
Pigden, C. 1989. “Logic and the Autonomy of Ethics” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 67(2): 127–151.Google Scholar
Pigden, C. 2007. “Desiring to Desire: Russell, Lewis and G.E. Moore” in Nuccetelli, and Seay, 2007.Google Scholar
Pigden, C. 2010. Hume on ‘Is’ and ‘Ought’. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Pigden, C. 2010a. “Introduction” in Pigden, 2010.Google Scholar
Pigden, C. 2010b. “Letter from a Gentleman in Dunedin to a Lady in the Countryside” in Pigden, 2010.Google Scholar
Pigden, C. 2010c. “Comments on ‘Hume’s Master Argument’” in Pigden, 2010.Google Scholar
Pigden, C. 2010d. “Snare’s Puzzle/Hume’s Purpose: Non-Cognitivism and What Hume Was Really Up to with No-Ought-From-Is” in Pigden, 2010.Google Scholar
Pigden, C. 2012. “Identifying Goodness” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90(1): 93–109.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. 2003. The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1948. “What Can Logic Do for Philosophy” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume 22: 141–154.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1966. The Open Society and Its Enemies, 5th edition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Provine, W. B. 1971. The Origins of Theoretical Population Genetics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Prior, A. N. 1949. Logic and the Basis of Ethics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Prior, A. N. 1960. “The Autonomy of Ethics” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 38(3): 199–206.Google Scholar
Prior, M. 1967. “Whately, Richard (1787–1863)” in Edwards, P (ed.) Encyclopedia of Philosophy vol. 7. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Pritchard, D. 2008. “Knowing the Answer, Understanding and Epistemic Value” Grazer Philosophische Studien 77: 325–339.Google Scholar
Pritchard, D. 2009. “Knowledge, Understanding and Epistemic Value” Royal Institute of Philosophy supp. 64: 19–43.Google Scholar
Pritchard, D. 2011. “What Is the Swamping Problem?” in Reisner, A. & Steglich-Petersen, A. (eds.) Reasons for Belief. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pritchard, D. & Turri, J. 2014. “The Value of Knowledge” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/knowledge-value.Google Scholar
Pryor, J. 2004. “What’s Wrong with Moore’s Argument?” Philosophical Issues 14: 349–378.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. 1973. “Meaning and Reference” The Journal of Philosophy 70(19): 699–711Google Scholar
Putnam, H. 1975. “The Meaning of ‘Meaning’” Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7: 131–193.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. 1981. Reason, Truth, and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. 1969. “Epistemology Naturalized” in his Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Quinn, P. 1978. Divine Commands and Moral Requirements. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Quinn, P. 1980. “Divine Command Ethics: A Causal Theory” reprinted in Miller, C. (ed.) Essays in the Philosophy of Religion. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Quinn, P. 2000. “Divine Command Theory” in LaFollette, 2000.Google Scholar
Quinn, P. 2002. “Obligation, Divine Commands and Abraham’s Dilemma” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64: 459–66.Google Scholar
Railton, P. 1986a. “Facts and Values” Philosophical Topics 14: 5–31.Google Scholar
Railton, P. 1986b. “Moral Realism” Philosophical Review 95(2): 163–207.Google Scholar
Railton, P. 1989. “Naturalism and Prescriptivity” Social Philosophy and Policy 7: 151–174.Google Scholar
Railton, P. 1993. “Reply to David Wiggins” in Haldane & Wright 1993.Google Scholar
Ravenscroft, I. (ed.) 2009. Minds, Ethics and Conditionals: Themes from the Philosophy of Frank Jackson. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. 1980. “Kantian Constructivism in Ethics” Journal of Philosophy 77: 515–72.Google Scholar
Regan, D. 2003. “How to Be a Moorean” Ethics 113: 651–677.Google Scholar
Regan, T. 1986. Bloomsbury’s Prophet. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Regan, T. 1991. G.E. Moore: The Elements of Ethics. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Regan, T. 1992. “Moore, G. E.” in The Encyclopedia of Ethics Vol II. Becker & Becker: 821.Google Scholar
Reid, T. 2002. Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man. Brookes, D.K. and Haakonssen, K. (eds.) Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Reid, T. 2005. Thomas Reid on Logic, Rhetoric and the Fine Arts. Broadie, A. (ed.) Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Reid, T. 2010 [1788]. Essays on the Active Powers of Man. Haakonssen, K. and Harris, J.A. (eds.) Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Richard, M. 2004. “Contextualism and Relativism” Philosophical Studies 119(1): 215–242.Google Scholar
Richards, R. J. 1987. Darwin and the Emergence of Evolutionary Theories of Mind and Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Richards, R. J. 2003. The Romantic Conception of Life: Science and Philosophy in the Age of Goethe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Richards, R. J. & Ruse, M. 2016. Debating Darwin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ridge, M. 2006. “Ecumenical Expressivism: Finessing Frege” Ethics 116(2): 302–334Google Scholar
Ridge, M. 2007. “Ecumenical Expressivism: The Best of Both Worlds?” Oxford Studies in Metaethics 2: 51–76.Google Scholar
Ridge, M. 2013. “Getting Lost on the road to Larissa” Noûs 47: 181–201.Google Scholar
Ridge, M. 2014. “Moral Non-Naturalism” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2014/entries/moral-non-naturalism/.Google Scholar
Ridge, M. 2014b. Impassioned Belief. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Riggs, W. 2009. “Understanding, Knowledge and the Meno Requirement” in Haddock, Millar & Pritchard, 2009.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 1980. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 1989. Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rosati, C. 1995a. “Persons, Perspectives and Full-Information Accounts of the Good” Ethics 105: 296–325Google Scholar
Rosati, C. 1995b. “Naturalism, Normativity and the Open Question Argument” Noûs 29(1): 46–70.Google Scholar
Rosati, C. 2003. “Agency and the Open Question Argument” Ethics 113(3): 490–527.Google Scholar
Rosati, C. 2006. “Personal Good” in Horgan, and Timmons, 2006.Google Scholar
Rosati, C. 2008. “Objectivism and Relational Good” Social Philosophy and Policy 25: 314–439.Google Scholar
Rosati, C. 2016. “Agents and Shmagents: An Essay on Agency and Normativity” in Oxford Studies in Metaethics 11: 182–213.Google Scholar
Rosati, C. 2018. “Mind Dependence and Moral Realism” in McPherson, & Plunkett, 2018.Google Scholar
Rosen, G. 2018. “Metaphysical Relations in Metaethics” in McPherson, & Plunkett, 2018.Google Scholar
Ross, W.D. 1930. The Right and the Good. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. 1979. Sociobiology: Sense or Nonsense? Dordrecht, Netherlands: ReidelGoogle Scholar
Ruse, M. 1986. Taking Darwin Seriously: A Naturalistic Approach to Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. 2006. Darwinianism and Its Discontents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ruse, M.(ed.) 2009. Philosophy after Darwin: Classic and Contemporary Readings. Princeton: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
Ruse, M. 2012. The Philosophy of Human Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. 2013. The Gaia Hypothesis: Science on a Pagan Planet. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. 2017a. Darwinism as Religion: What Literature Tells Us About Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Ruse, M. 2017b. On Purpose. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. & Richards, R .J. (eds.) 2017. The Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. & Wilson, E. O. 1986. “Moral Philosophy as Applied Science” Philosophy 61: 173–192.Google Scholar
Russell, B. 1904. “Review of Principia Ethica by G.E. Moore” Independent Review 2: 329–333.Google Scholar
Russell, B. 1937. Power: A New Social Analysis. London: Allen and UnwinGoogle Scholar
Russell, B. 1959. My Philosophical Development. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Russell, B. 1983. The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, Volume 1. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Russell, B. 1999. Russell on Ethics, Pigden, C. (ed.) London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Russell, G. 2010. “In Defence of Hume’s Law” in Pigden, 2010.Google Scholar
Rysiew, P. 2016. “Naturalism in Epistemology” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2016/entries/epistemology-naturalized/.Google Scholar
Sankey, H. 2010. “Witchcraft, Relativism and the Problem of the Criterion” Erkenntnis 72: 1–16Google Scholar
Sankey, H. 2011. “Epistemic Relativism and the Problem of the Criterion” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science Part A 42(4): 562–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankey, H. 2012. “Scepticism, Relativism and the Argument from the Criterion” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43(1): 182–190.Google Scholar
Scanlon, T. 2000. What We Owe to Each Other. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scanlon, T. 2014. Being Realistic about Reasons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schilpp, P. (ed.) 1942. The Philosophy of G.E. Moore. Evanston and Chicago: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Schmidtz, D. 2011. “Review of Why Some Things Should Not Be for Sale by Debra Satz” The Journal of Philosophy 108(4): 219–223.Google Scholar
Schneewind, J. 1977. Sidgwick’s Ethics and Victorian Moral Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Schroeder, M. 2008a. “Expression for Expressivists” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research LXXVI: 86–116Google Scholar
Schroeder, M. 2008b. “How Expressivists Can and Should Solve Their Problem with Negation” Noûs 42(4): 573–599.Google Scholar
Schroeder, M. 2008c. Being For. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schueler, G. 1988. “Modus Ponens and Moral Realism” Ethics 98: 492–500.Google Scholar
Schueler, G. 1995. Desire: Its Role in Practical Reason and the Explanation of Action. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Seager, W. 2016. Theories of Consciousness: An Introduction and Assessment (Second Edition). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Searle, J. 1962. “Meaning and Speech Acts” Philosophical Review 71(4): 423–432.Google Scholar
Searle, J. 1964. “How to Derive ‘Ought’ from ‘Is’” Philosophical Review 73(4): 512–516.Google Scholar
Seth, A. 1896. “The Term ‘Naturalism’ in Recent Discussion” The Philosophical Review 5(6): 576–584.Google Scholar
Seth, J. 1897. “The Standpoint and Method of Ethics” Philosophical Review 6(3): 275–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Setiya, K. 2003. “Explaining Action” Philosophical Review 112: 339–393.Google Scholar
Shafer-Landau, R. 2003. Moral Realism: A Defense. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidgwick, H. 1876. “The Theory of Evolution and Its Application to Practice” Mind 1: 52–67.Google Scholar
Sidgwick, H. 1880. “Kant’s Refutation of Idealism” Mind 5(17): 111–115.Google Scholar
Sidgwick, H. 1883. “A Criticism of the Critical Philosophy” Part I: Mind 8(29): 69–91. Part II: Mind 8 (31): 313–337.Google Scholar
Sidgwick, H. 1888. “The Kantian Conception of Free Will” Mind 13(51): 405–412.Google Scholar
Sidgwick, H. 1907. Methods of Ethics (7th edition). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Sidgwick, H. 2000. Essays on Ethics and Method. Singer, Marcus (ed.) Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, N. 2006. “Two Kinds of Naturalism in Ethics” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 9: 417–39.Google Scholar
Sinclair, N. 2007. “Expressivism and the Practicality of Moral Convictions” Journal of Value Inquiry 41(2–4): 201–220.Google Scholar
Sinclair, N. 2009. “Recent Work in Expressivism” Analysis 69(1): 136–147.Google Scholar
Sinclair, N. 2012. “Moral Realism, Face-Values and Presumptions” Analytic Philosophy 53(2): 158–179.Google Scholar
Skorupski, J. 1993. English-Language Philosophy 1750 to 1945. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, M. 1994. The Moral Problem. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Smith, M. 2000. “Moral Realism” in LaFollette, 2000.Google Scholar
Smith, M. 2001. “Some Not-much-discussed Problems for Non-cognitivism in Ethics” Ratio 14: 93–115.Google Scholar
Smith, M. 2004. Ethics and the A Priori. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, M. 2013. “A Constitutivist Theory of Reasons: Its Promise and Parts” Law, Ethics and Philosophy 1: 1–30.Google Scholar
Smith, Martin. 2014. “Knowledge, Justification and Normative Coincidence” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 89(2): 273–95.Google Scholar
Snare, F. 1975. “The Open Question as a Linguistic Test” Ratio 17(1): 122.Google Scholar
Sobel, D. 1994. “Full Information Accounts of Well-Being” Ethics 104: 784–810.Google Scholar
Solzhenitsyn, A. 1962. One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. Rutherford, NJ: Signet Classics (2008).Google Scholar
Sosa, E. 2009. “Knowing Full Well: The Normativity of Beliefs as Performances” Philosophical Studies 142(1): 5–15.Google Scholar
Spencer, H. 1851. Social Statics: Or the Conditions Essential to Human Happiness Specified and the First of them Developed. London: J. Chapman.Google Scholar
Spencer, H. 1857. “Progress: Its Law and Cause” Westminster Review LXVII: 244–267.Google Scholar
Spencer, H. 1860. “The Social Organism” Westminster Review.Google Scholar
Spencer, H. 1879. The Data of Ethics. London: Williams and Norgate.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starhawk, , 2009. “Power, Authority, and Mystery: Ecofeminism and Earth-based Spirituality” in Diomond, I. and Orenstein, G. (eds.) Reweaving the World: The Emergence of Ecofeminism. San Francisco: Sierra Club.Google Scholar
Stevenson, C. L. 1937. “The Emotive Meaning of Ethical Terms” Mind 46(181): 14–31.Google Scholar
Stevenson, C. L. 1944. Ethics and Language. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Stevenson, C. L. 1961. “Relativism and Non-Relativism in the Theory of Value” Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 35: 25–44.Google Scholar
Stevenson, C. L. 1963. Facts and Values. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Stout, G. F. 1896. Analytic Psychology. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Stout, G. F. 1926. “Ward As Psychologist” The Monist 36(1): 20–55.Google Scholar
Stout, G. F. 1931. Mind and Matter. Gifford Lectures (1919, 1921). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stout, G. F. 1952. God and Nature. Gifford Lectures (1919, 1921, ed. A.K. Stout). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Strawson, G. 1994. Mental Reality. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Strawson, G. 2008. “Real Intentionality 3: Why Intentionality Entails Consciousness” in his Real Materialism and Other Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Street, S. 2006. “A Darwinian Dilemma for Realist Theories of Value” Philosophical Studies 127: 109–166.Google Scholar
Street, S. 2008. “Constructivism about Reasons” in Oxford Studies in Metaethics 3: 207–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Street, S. 2010. “What Is Constructivism in Ethics and Metaethics?” Philosophy Compass 5: 363–384.Google Scholar
Street, S. 2012. “Coming to Terms with Contingency: Humean Constructivism about Practical Reason” in Lenman, J. & Shemmer, Y. (eds.) Constructivism in Practical Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 41–62.Google Scholar
Streumer, B. 2017. Unbelievable Errors: An Error Theory about All Normative Judgments. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sturgeon, N. 2003. “Moore on Ethical Naturalism” Ethics 113(3): 528–556.Google Scholar
Sturgeon, N. 2006. “Ethical Naturalism” in Copp, 2006.Google Scholar
Sylvan, R. 1973. “Is There a Need for a New, an Environmental, Ethic?” Proceedings of XVth World Congress of Philosophy 1: 205–210.Google Scholar
Tarski, A. 1983. Logic, Semantics, and Meta-Mathematics, 2nd edition. J. H. Woodger, trans, Corcoran, J. (ed.) Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Taylor, L. 2016. “Can Robert Adams Survive Moral Twin Earth?” Journal of Religious Ethics 44(2): 334–351.Google Scholar
Turri, J. & Klein, P. 2014. Ad Infinitum: New Essays on Epistemological Infinitism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Urmson, J. O. 1968. The Emotive Theory of Ethics. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
van Roojen, M. 1996. “Expressivism and Irrationality” The Philosophical Review 105: 311–355.Google Scholar
van Roojen, M. 2004. “Moral Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism” in Zalta (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2004 edition), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2004/entries/moral-cognitivism/.Google Scholar
Veatch, H. 1966. “Non-cognitivism in Ethics: A Modest Proposal for Its Diagnosis and Cure” Ethics 76(2): 102–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velleman, D. 1989. Practical Reflection. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wainwright, W. 2005. Religion and Morality. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
Walsh, W. 1981. “Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: Commentators in English, 1875–1945” Journal of the History of Ideas 42(4): 723–737.Google Scholar
Ward, J. 1886. “Psychological Principles: I” Mind (old series) viii: 153–169.Google Scholar
Ward, J. 1886. “Psychological Principles II: Fundamental Facts and Conceptions” Mind (old series) viii: 465–486.Google Scholar
Ward, J. 1887. “Psychological Principles III” Mind (old series) xii: 45–67.Google Scholar
Ward, J.“Psychology” Encyclopedia Britannica (Vol. 9)Google Scholar
Ward, J. 1893. “Modern Psychology: A Reflection” Mind 2(5): 54–82.Google Scholar
Ward, J. 1922. A Study of Kant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wedgwood, R. 2007. The Nature of Normativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
White, A. 1958. G. E. Moore: A Critical Exposition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wheeler, W. 1928. The Social Insects: Their Origin and Evolution. New York: Harcourt, Brace.Google Scholar
Wierenga, E. 1983. “A Defensible Divine Command Theory” Noûs 17: 387–407.Google Scholar
Wiggins, D. 1976. “Truth, Invention, and the Meaning of Life” Proceedings of the British Academy 62: 331–78.Google Scholar
Wiggins, D. 1993. “Cognitivism, Naturalism, and Normativity: A Reply to Peter Railton” in Haldane & Wright, 1993.Google Scholar
Williams, B. 1985. Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. London: Fontana Press.Google Scholar
Williams, M. 1996. Unnatural Doubts: Epistemological Realism and the Basis of Scepticism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, M. 2007. “Why (Wittgensteinian) Contextualism Is Not Relativism” Episteme 4(1): 93–114.Google Scholar
Williamson, T. 2001. “Ethics, Supervenience, and Ramsey Sentences” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 62: 625–30.Google Scholar
Williamson, T. 2007. The Philosophy of Philosophy. Maiden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wilson, D. & Wilson, E. O. 2007. “Rethinking the Theoretical Foundation of Sociobiology” Quarterly Review of Biology 82: 327–348Google Scholar
Wilson, E. O. 1975. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, E. O. 1992. The Diversity of Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, E. O. 2002. The Future of Life. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. 2014. “No Need for a Theory of Grounding” Inquiry 57: 535–579.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1961. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, trans. D. F. Pears and B .F. McGuinness, New York: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1969. On Certainty. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1980. Wittgenstein’s Lectures, Cambridge 1930–1932. Lee, D. (ed.) Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Woods, J. 2014. “Expressivism and Moore’s Paradox” Philosophers’ Imprint 14: 1–12.Google Scholar
Wright, C. 2008. “Fear of Relativism?” Philosophical Studies 141(3): 379–390.Google Scholar
Zagzebski, L. 2004. Divine Motivation Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zell-Ravenheart, O. 2009. Green Egg Omelet: An Anthology of Art and Articles from the Legendary Pagan Journal. Franklin Lakes, NJ: New Page Books.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Bibliography
  • Edited by Neil Sinclair, University of Nottingham
  • Book: The Naturalistic Fallacy
  • Online publication: 16 November 2018
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316717578.015
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Bibliography
  • Edited by Neil Sinclair, University of Nottingham
  • Book: The Naturalistic Fallacy
  • Online publication: 16 November 2018
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316717578.015
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Bibliography
  • Edited by Neil Sinclair, University of Nottingham
  • Book: The Naturalistic Fallacy
  • Online publication: 16 November 2018
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316717578.015
Available formats
×