You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
Review: Should Moore Have Followed His Own Method?
Reviewed Work: Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century, Volume 1, The Dawn of Analysis by Scott Soames
Review by: Daniel Stoljar
Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition
Vol. 129, No. 3 (Jun., 2006), pp. 609-618
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4321777
Page Count: 10
Preview not available
Note: This article is a review of another work, such as a book, film, musical composition, etc. The original work is not included in the purchase of this review.
I discuss Soames's proposal that Moore could have avoided a central problem in his moral philosophy if he had utilized a method he himself pioneered in epistemology. The problem in Moore's moral philossophy concerns what it is for a moral claim to be self-evident. The method in Moore's epistemology concerns not denying the obvious. In view of the distance between something's being self-evident and its being obvious, it is suggested that Soames's proposal is mistaken.
Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition © 2006 Springer