​
What Nietzsche calls attention to is not “ordinary” or “folk” moral disagreement, but rather what seems to me the single most important and embarrassing fact about the history of moral theorizing by philosophers over the last two millennia: namely, that no rational consensus has been secured on any substantive, foundational proposition about morality...the history of moral philosophy is the history of intractable disagreement.
- Brian Leiter
Stay tuned below for a new feature to this newsletter with a free resource.
But first, I love this quote:
Moral disagreement is pervasive among both philosophers and non-philosophers. Perhaps it’s no surprise that non-philosophers disagree about ethics, but widespread, intractable moral disagreement among philosophers is more striking (and more troubling). Aren’t moral philosophers supposed to be the experts—maybe not with respect to being moral but at least with respect to knowing the moral truths?
The kicker:
What do ethicists do at their jobs all day if they’re not discovering, or making progress toward discovering, the moral truths? And why, after several thousand years of ethical inquiry, have they not been able to make any progress toward consensus? It seems philosophers are no closer to reaching agreement about ethics today than they were when Socrates walked the streets of Athens.
That's from Purdue philosopher Eric Sampson in his paper, "The Self-Undermining Arguments from Disagreement" in Oxford Studies in Metaethics, vol. 14.
You might be wondering how he was able to read your mind. It reflects how many people, perhaps yourself included, look at philosophy, and in this particular case the branch of ethics.
What do ethicists do at their jobs all day?
Widespread and entrenched disagreement within philosophy often motivates skepticism about the usefulness of philosophy generally, or about more particular claims, like whether there can be any moral facts in the face of so many disputed views.
In their most honest moments, widespread disagreement--with no end in sight--troubles philosophers about what exactly they offer as a profession.
Sampson's paper doesn't exactly solve this problem, but it does take some of the bite out of it.
Instead of considering all the individual arguments against non-skeptical moral realism from the fact of disagreement, he tackles the structure of four kinds of arguments and shows that arguments from disagreement actually undermine themselves.
In short, if mere disagreement about a belief is alone sufficient to be skeptical of that belief, what premises could possibly be offered for such an argument that aren't themselves points of disagreement?
If you have ever worried whether disagreement should cause us to deny the stability and truth of something we believe, Sampson's piece is worth a slow read.
I want to add a little more utility to this weekly newsletter, so each week I will include a free philosophy resource to add to your library.
This was the first one. Sometimes the resource will be full books, though most of the time they will be articles or chapters like Sampson's. It will look something like this:
This Week's Free Philosophy Resource:
Title: "The Self-Undermining Arguments from Disagreement" in Oxford Studies in Metaethics, vol. 14
Author: Eric Sampson, Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Purdue University
Reading Level: Mid/Upper-Level College
I'm sure my summaries of these free resources will vary in length and depth, but I hope this new feature of the newsletter will be useful for those who want to add to their philosophical library.
Until next time.
Jared
If you like listening to just audio in the car, on a run, or while you're supposed to be working, subscribe to the podcast so you never miss an episode:
If you like watching the conversation, subscribe, and the latest episode will show up in your feed. (Extra credit: like whatever videos you watch if you genuinely like what you're hearing.)
 |
$5.00
Selling Plato's Tip Jar
Selling Plato's Academy courses, Selling Plato's Dialogues, and the podcast would not be possible without your ongoing... Read more |
​
Take a sec to follow us on
X: https://x.com/sellingplato​
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@selling.plato​
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sellingplato/​
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sellingplato​
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/sellingplato​
Threads: https://www.threads.net/@sellingplato​
​
🏛️ If you're ready to get started learning logic, I offer a low-cost, subscription-based course. You can try it free for a week and see what you think:
Selling Plato's Dialogues
If you think someone else will like this Dialogues newsletter, please forward it along to your friends and family!
If you received this email as a forward, click to subscribe!
​