Introduction to PhilosophyNotesThis is not a substitute for coming to class Richard Lee
Philosophy 2003 C 001Copyright © 1999, Richard Lee Spring 1999
 

Critique of the Revised Version of the CDA

Validity
This version is valid.
Premise 1
Premise 1 is acceptable.
Premise 2
Premise 2 is most objectionable. For one thing, it begs the question: it presumes relativism. More critique later.
Premise 3
Premise 3 is also wrong. One moral code could be silent on the rightness or wrongness, say, of attending religious services while another claimed it to be right. The codes would differ, but not in the way presumed in 3.
Premise 4
Premise 4 may seem plausible, but compare: If someone is tall relative to one society (or group of people), but short relative to another, then there is no objective truth in height. Seems false!


Richard Lee, rlee@comp.uark.edu, last modified: 24 February 1999