Shafer-Landau and Korsgaard

Humanity is taught to be moral, do good and avoid evil. But these lessons will be foolish when we are told what is morality and what to accomplish. Because many ethics are beneficial, beneficial work is moral. For those who focus only on the surface of the problem, the roundabout's answer may be satisfactory, but moral problems will be questioned once excavation begins. Although this problem has been seen countlessly without general solutions, there are already many opinions of thinkers and scholars on morality in the conclusion.

Russ Shafer - Landau got a doctorate. At the University of Arizona, I am currently teaching at the University of Wisconsin Madison, focusing on ethical theory and law philosophy. He is the author of moral foundation, moral realism, defense, whether it happens or is bad. He is also a series editor of Metaethics Oxford Research.

Russ Shafer - Landau: "The externalists claim that the relationship between moral judgment and motivation is a coincidence factor - the recognized content of the psychological composition of men and the moral needs" (Shafer - Landau 2003 p. 151). An unnecessary situation, a contradiction with respect to discretion, and neo relativism is a situation in which "the content of perceived moral request" - "motivated" motivation affects moral judgment. The situation of people without depression and lists, and the loss of her "moral" people, "the injury of psychological constitution" - the relationship between moral judgment and motivation - (Shafer-Landau 2003 p.151)

Through his argument in this section, Shafer-Landau tries to convey subjective conflicts and the tendency of individuals to question their moral beliefs (p. 296). I object to this conclusion in two ways. Each corresponds to the two most likely causes that Shafer-Landau considers inconsistent. First, if Shafer-Landau's conclusion is based on this erroneous premise of this conflict, we have decided it is not reasonable. Because we tend to question the moral truth of facts. Secondly, if we are based on the premise that we can not easily adapt or change subjective moral truths by casting doubts on our own moral values, this conclusion is irrational I thought.