Blog powered by Typepad

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Your email address:

Powered by FeedBlitz

Become a Fan

« Descartes interpretation | Main | Diplomatic ambiguity »

October 21, 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Jim Farmelant

Do you think that Carnap might have been drawn to something like R.M. Hare's prescriptivism, which as I understand it, was non-cognitivist, but which insisted on the rationality and universalizability of moral judgments?

Aaron Boyden

I have not read Hare for a very long time; I recall finding him really annoying, but I was an undergrad then, and I don't really remember why I thought that and don't trust the judgment of my younger self enough to be confident it was a good reason, much less that it's automatically something Carnap would have agreed with me about (though I was quite the little positivist back then). I guess I think if Carnap would have had a problem with Hare, it would have been about the details of his view; your brief description doesn't sound like anything Carnap would have had problems with.

I suppose I should go re-read my Hare, though; I think I do actually own one of his books.

The comments to this entry are closed.