Abstract

This article deals with Parfit's metaethics, which is presented in "On What Matters": Volume Three. In this book, Parfit defends a view he calls 'non-realist cognitivism'. The main idea is that ethical sentences express irreducibly normative concepts and refer to irreducible normative properties. Parfit's defense of this view is sketched mainly by showing that competing metaethical views are either wrong or reducible to non realist cognitivism. In particular, Parfit argues that A. Gibbard's and P. Railton's views can be reconciled with his own non-realist cognitivism. The article ends with a quick assessment of this strategy, which is based on the idea of a convergence of seemingly different theories.