Skip navigation
  • Home
  • Browse
    • Communities
      & Collections
    • Browse Items by:
    • Publication Date
    • Author
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Department
  • Sign on to:
    • My MacSphere
    • Receive email
      updates
    • Edit Profile


McMaster University Home Page
  1. MacSphere
  2. Open Access Dissertations and Theses Community
  3. Open Access Dissertations and Theses
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11375/15778
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorNajm, S.-
dc.contributor.authorHartley, Ross Morley-
dc.date.accessioned2014-08-22T12:02:48Z-
dc.date.available2014-08-22T12:02:48Z-
dc.date.issued1975-06-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11375/15778-
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this essay is to analyse the problem of the rational justification of value judgments. To a large extent, I have used Taylor's account of the technique of justification (verification, validation, vindication, and rational choice of a way of life), as this is presented in his book, Normative Discourse. To a lesser extent, I have also used Baier's account of the technique of validation, as it is presented in his book, The Moral Point of View. I have attempted to show that it is possible to justify value judgments, despite the logical dichotomy between factual statements and evaluative statements. 'Justification' is taken as proof of correctness: that is, a statement is said to be justified if it is proven to be correct. On Taylor's technique, justification is possible, although only incompletely so. It is possible to prove that a value judgment is the correct one to make from within the perspective provided by a given way of life. Justification cannot be complete since the adoption of the perspective cannot be justified. On Baier's technique of validation, complete justification can be achieved: once it has been shown that an evaluatum meets the criteria in terms of which it was judged, and that these criteria are relevant (valid) for judging that object since the object must meet these criteria in order effectively to realize its purpose, nothing more needs to be shown. Although Baier's account allows for complete justification while Taylor's allows for only incomplete justification, Baier's account cannot be used to replace that of Taylor. They are appropriate in different contexts. While Baier's account of validation is appropriate for judgments of use-value, Taylor's account is appropriate for value judgments other than those of use-value. Accordingly, justification is possible using either technique, although complete justification may be possible only in the context of judgments of use-value.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectrational justification, value judgments, technique, verification, validation, vindication, choice, way of life, Normative Discourse, The Moral Point of View, logical,en_US
dc.titleThe Problem of the Justification of Value Judgments with Reference to the View of Taylor, in Normative Discourseen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.contributor.departmentPhilosophyen_US
dc.description.degreetypeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeMaster of Arts (MA)en_US
Appears in Collections:Open Access Dissertations and Theses

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Hartley Ross.pdf
Open Access
4.05 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record Statistics


Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Sherman Centre for Digital Scholarship     McMaster University Libraries
©2022 McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L8 | 905-525-9140 | Contact Us | Terms of Use & Privacy Policy | Feedback

Report Accessibility Issue