Argunet Debates

Debates / Debate / Argument Map / Node

Argument: Implicit premiss

  1. In moral dispute people always say things like "That is stealing, therefore you should not do it."
  2. These speech acts must be understood as reasons.
  3. These speech acts can only be interpreted as reasons if we understand them as arguments.
  4. We can only understand them as arguments if we add a general moral principle (i.e. "you should never steal") as implicit premiss.
  5. These speech acts use general moral principles.
  6. If our everyday moral reasoning is based on general moral principles, universal moral particularism has to be wrong.
  7. Universal Moral particularism is wrong.

This is a search-engine-friendly version of Argunet. To view the human-eye-friendly version please activate Javascript in your browser