Realism, Objectivity, and Evaluation

Justin Clarke‐Doane
{"title":"Realism, Objectivity, and Evaluation","authors":"Justin Clarke‐Doane","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198823667.003.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter discusses “realist pluralism” in mathematics and morality. It argues that, under the assumption of pluralism, factual questions get deflated while practical -- i.e., what-to-do -- questions do not. It then uses this contrast to formulate a radicalization of Moore’s Open Question Argument. Practical questions remain open even when the facts, including the evaluative facts, come cheaply. The chapter concludes that practical realism must be false, but practical questions are objective in a paradigmatic respect. Conversely, mathematical realism is true, but mathematical questions fail to be objective. An important upshot of the discussion is that the concepts of realism and objectivity, which are widely identified, are actually in tension.","PeriodicalId":254890,"journal":{"name":"Morality and Mathematics","volume":"114 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Morality and Mathematics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198823667.003.0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This chapter discusses “realist pluralism” in mathematics and morality. It argues that, under the assumption of pluralism, factual questions get deflated while practical -- i.e., what-to-do -- questions do not. It then uses this contrast to formulate a radicalization of Moore’s Open Question Argument. Practical questions remain open even when the facts, including the evaluative facts, come cheaply. The chapter concludes that practical realism must be false, but practical questions are objective in a paradigmatic respect. Conversely, mathematical realism is true, but mathematical questions fail to be objective. An important upshot of the discussion is that the concepts of realism and objectivity, which are widely identified, are actually in tension.
现实主义、客观性和评价
本章讨论数学和道德中的“现实主义多元论”。它认为,在多元主义的假设下,事实性问题会被弱化,而实践性问题——即“做什么”——则不会。然后,它利用这种对比,将摩尔的开放性问题论证进行激进化。即使事实(包括可评估的事实)来得很便宜,实际问题仍然是开放的。这一章的结论是,实际的现实主义必然是错误的,但实际问题在范式方面是客观的。相反,数学实在论是正确的,但数学问题不是客观的。讨论的一个重要结论是,现实主义和客观性这两个被广泛认同的概念实际上处于紧张状态。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信