<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Non-Cognitivism · Pablo Stafforini</title><link>https://stafforini.com/tags/non-cognitivism/</link><description/><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://stafforini.com/tags/non-cognitivism/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>naturalism</title><link>https://stafforini.com/quotes/parfit-naturalism/</link><pubDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://stafforini.com/quotes/parfit-naturalism/</guid><description>&lt;![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Naturalism and Non-Cognitivism are both […] close to Nihilism. Normativity is either an illusion, or involves irreducibly normative facts.</p></blockquote>
]]></description></item><item><title>metaethics</title><link>https://stafforini.com/quotes/wittgenstein-metaethics/</link><pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://stafforini.com/quotes/wittgenstein-metaethics/</guid><description>&lt;![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Now when this is urged against me I at once see clearly, as it were in a flash of light, not only that no description that I can think of would do to describe what I mean by absolute value, but that I would reject any significant description that anybody could possibly suggest,<em>ab initio</em>, on the ground of its significance. That is to say: I see now that these nonsensical expressions were not nonsensical because I had not yet found the correct expressions, but that their nonsensicality was their very essence.</p></blockquote>
]]></description></item></channel></rss>