What is your answer?

What premise is missing from Ima Emotivist's "logical positivism" argument?

    Moral statements aren't empirical (testable by sense experience).
    Moral statements aren't analytic (true by definition).
    [... missing premise ...]
    So moral statements aren't genuine truth claims.
    { 1 } - People's "moral intuitions" depend greatly on social influences.
    { 2 } - Moral judgments are emotional exclamations.
    { 3 } - Any genuine truth claim is either empirical or analytic.

<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 3.
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























1 is wrong. Please try again.

What premise is missing from Ima Emotivist's "logical positivism" argument?

    Moral statements aren't empirical (testable by sense experience).
    Moral statements aren't analytic (true by definition).
    [... missing premise ...]
    So moral statements aren't genuine truth claims.

This wouldn't make the argument valid.

<= back | menu | forward =>
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























2 is wrong. Please try again.

What premise is missing from Ima Emotivist's "logical positivism" argument?

    Moral statements aren't empirical (testable by sense experience).
    Moral statements aren't analytic (true by definition).
    [... missing premise ...]
    So moral statements aren't genuine truth claims.
    { 1 } - People's "moral intuitions" depend greatly on social influences.
    { 2 } - Moral judgments are emotional exclamations.
    { 3 } - Any genuine truth claim is either empirical or analytic.

This wouldn't make the argument valid.

<= back | menu | forward =>
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























3 is correct!

What premise is missing from Ima Emotivist's "logical positivism" argument?

    Moral statements aren't empirical (testable by sense experience).
    Moral statements aren't analytic (true by definition).
    [... missing premise ...]
    So moral statements aren't genuine truth claims.
    { 1 } - People's "moral intuitions" depend greatly on social influences.
    { 2 } - Moral judgments are emotional exclamations.
    { 3 } - Any genuine truth claim is either empirical or analytic.

This premise, which is the central claim of logical positivism, seems to be self-refuting. Since this premise isn't itself either analytic or empirical, it would follow that it can't be a genuine truth claim.

<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























the end