The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Moral Realism: A Defence
Abstract
This is a book in metaethics that defends a brand of moral realism known as non‐naturalism. The book has five Parts. Part I outlines the sort of moral realism that the author wishes to defend, and then offers critiques of expressivism and constructivism. Part II is devoted to issues in metaphysics. It argues that moral realists have adequate replies to worries based on supervenience and the alleged causal inefficacy of moral facts. Part III is devoted to issues of moral motivation. It argues that motivational internalism is false, and that a Humean theory of action is also mistaken. Part IV is devoted to an extended discussion of moral reasons. It argues that externalism about reasons is true, that moral rationalism is true, and that moral realism has an adequate account of moral disagreement. Part V is devoted to moral epistemology. It argues for the self‐evidence of pro tanto moral principles, and for a version of reliabilism about ethical knowledge.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Kripke, S. A. (1972) · Semantics of Natural Language · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-2557-7_9 · Cited by 7,028
Special sciences (or: The disunity of science as a working hypothesis)
Fodor, J. A. (1974) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/bf00485230 · Cited by 1,815
Plantinga, A. (1993) · doi:10.1093/0195078640.001.0001 · Cited by 1,703
Foot, P. (2001) · doi:10.1093/0198235089.001.0001 · Cited by 1,356
The Humean Theory of Motivation
SMITH, M. (1987) · Mind · doi:10.1093/mind/xcvi.381.36 · Cited by 1,005
Multiple realization and the metaphysics of reduction.
Kim, J. (1992) · Philosophy and Phenomenological Research · doi:10.2307/2107741 · Cited by 615
Cited by
A Darwinian Dilemma for Realist Theories of Value
Street, S. (2006) · Philosophical Studies · doi:10.1007/s11098-005-1726-6 · Cited by 1,247
The moral fixed points: new directions for moral nonnaturalism
Cuneo, T., & Shafer-Landau, R. (2014) · Philosophical Studies · doi:10.1007/s11098-013-0277-5 · Cited by 270
Self-citationEnoch, D. (2010) · Philosophical Studies · doi:10.1007/s11098-009-9333-6 · Cited by 224
SARKISSIAN, H., PARK, J., TIEN, D., WRIGHT, J. C., & KNOBE, J. (2011) · Mind & Language · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0017.2011.01428.x · Cited by 184
Moral Disagreement and Moral Semantics
Khoo, J., & Knobe, J. (2018) · Noûs · doi:10.1111/nous.12151 · Cited by 82
Metadata
- Authors
- Shafer-Landau, R.
- Publisher
- Oxford University PressOxford
- Published
- 2003-06-19
- OpenAlex
- W4233277322
- Cited by
- 972
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 19.37
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Moral Realism: A Defence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/0199259755.001.0001
- The paper
- Shafer-Landau, R. (2003). Moral Realism: A Defence. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199259755.001.0001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.