چکیده:
This article seeks to explain, evaluate, and assess the theory of ethical intuitionism regarding the justification of moral propositions. Using a descriptive-analytical method, this article first explains the concept of justification using duty-based and non-duty-based perspectives, and examines the factors, structure, types, and sources of justification based on the theories of Formerton and Walter. An attempt has been made to distinguish between philosophical justification and other conventional moral justifications among people. Since, among different ethical perspectives, cognitivists and realists believe in the justifiability of moral propositions, the red lines of these theories with opposing views have been carefully clarified in a brief discussion. Finally, ethical intuitionism, which is one of the most important and popular justificatory theories in this field, has been examined, and the strengths and weaknesses of this theory in justifying moral propositions compared to various types of justification have been stated.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Since, among different ethical perspectives, cognitivists and realists believe in the justifiability of moral propositions, the red lines of these theories have been carefully clarified in a brief discussion in relation to opposing views.
Finally, ethical intuitionism, which is one of the most important and popular justificatory theories in this field, has been examined, and the strengths and weaknesses of this theory in justifying moral propositions compared to different types of justification have been stated.
Keywords: Justification, Moral Proposition, Ethical Intuitionism Introduction Some people believe that a certain action is right, while others do not.
Since ethics talks about things that are good and bad from a moral point of view, moral epistemology also deals with the question of how a person knows, or in their belief that something is morally good or bad, is justified.
Moral epistemology deals with the justification and how to know the beliefs and claims raised in normative ethics.
Therefore, when some people disagree about normative ethical issues, for example, about “the morality and immorality of abortion,” they look for a way to resolve these differences to show which of these perspectives are justified.
What ethical intuitionists deny is that a person must have the ability to infer (P or J) from a rational analysis; for example, from the reality of these matters, or from other moral beliefs in other cases, or from a more general moral principle, or from anything else in order to justify their belief in (P and J).
(
, 
, 
)
