PhilArchive
open access
How Different Kinds of Disagreement Impact Folk Metaethical Judgments
Th e present article reports a series of experiments designed to extend the empirical investigation of folk metaethical intuitions by examining how different kinds of ethical disagreement can impact attributions of objectivity to ethical claims.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Categorizing judgments as likely to be selected by intuition or deliberation#87741
- The Influence of Social Interaction on Intuitions of Objectivity and Subjectivity#734036
- The Relevance of Folk Intuitions to Philosophical Debates#733012
- Hybrid Accounts of Ethical Thought and Talk#773302
- Peer Disagreement, Rational Requirements, and Evidence of Evidence as Evidence Against#762845
Record · ID 700309
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive