3.8 Article

Tiantai Metaethics

期刊

AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY
卷 100, 期 2, 页码 215-229

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00048402.2021.1908379

关键词

metaethics; Chinese Madhyamaka; Tiantai Buddhism; moral dialetheism; moral trivialism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper explores the metaethical views of the Tiantai Buddhist school in medieval China, suggesting that these views can be reconstructed in contemporary terms to develop new theories and contribute to the field of comparative metaethics. It also discusses the exhaustion of contemporary metaethical views in epistemic terms and introduces the novel concepts of moral dialetheism and moral trivialism as alternatives to existing theories.
This paper is a contribution to the emerging field of comparative metaethics, which aims to analyse the metaethical views of philosophical traditions outside the Western mainstream. It argues that the metaethical views implicit in the mediaeval Chinese school of Tiantai Buddhism can be reconstructed in contemporary terms in order to develop two novel views. These views are moral dialetheism and moral trivialism. The taxonomy of contemporary metaethical views, in epistemic terms, is exhausted by either partial success, or complete error, theories. They claim, respectively, either that some moral judgments are true (and some false) or that all moral judgments are false. There are also noncognitivist and nonfactualist views, claiming that all moral judgments are technically neither true nor false. In opposition to this moral truth gap, moral dialetheism and moral trivialism offer a moral truth glut. These views say, respectively, that some moral judgments and their negations are true and that all moral judgments and their negations are true. The upshot of this metaethical reconstruction of Tiantai Buddhism is that it allows us to complete the contemporary metaethical taxonomy, and to contribute to the therapeutic goal of finding ways to utilize metaethical reflection for the sake of release from the pathologies of morality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据