Learn it, not just write it.

Summaries, flashcards, concept maps, quizzes and mock exams — generated from your course materials.

PHIL 201 · deck

Metaethics — core concepts

1 / 5

AI Study Tutor · grounded in your course materials

Ask anything from your syllabus

Explain Harman's argument like I'm prepping for tomorrow's quiz.

Harman (1975) argues moral judgements presuppose an implicit agreement among a group. So when we say "X ought to do Y," we're saying X has reason to do Y given the agreement they're part of. The bite of the view: someone outside that agreement may have no such reason at all.

Sources: Harman 1975 (p. 3–6); your lecture 04 notes.