An Objective Concern: The Underlying Subjectivity of Foot's Natural Normativity
2011
- 3Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage3
- Abstract Views3
Article Description
This comps project critically analyzes Philippa Foot's metaethical project as outlined in her 2001 book: Natural Goodness. Foot wishes to create a metaethical framework for evaluative judgements that avoids the subjectivity of Non-Cognitive ethical theories. I summarize Foot's project and explore how it can respond to two objections: the first an objection from biology and the second a metaphysical concern regarding objectivity. I argue that Foot can counter the biological objection and also has a plausible response to the objectivity concern.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know