Moral naturalism and categorical reasons

Abstract

This chapter explains moral naturalism from Richard Joyce's contention that any philosopher with broadly naturalist inclinations should reject moral naturalism in favor of the error theory, according to which there are no moral facts at all. Moral naturalism of the sort comprises two claims. The first is that there are moral facts. The second claim is that the Humean theory of reasons is true. According to the Humean theory, nothing is a reason for an agent unless and because she has desires of the appropriate types. Moral naturalists might claim that thinking of some moral reasons as being categorical is not only something one find very natural, but also the best way to acquire moral reasons. A single line of argument would be sufficient to dispose of moral naturalism, expressivism, moral fictionalism, moral subjectivism, and other views, since they all fail to describe a system of moral concepts.