ABSTRACT

How should a particularist understand basic moral facts and our knowledge

of them? Since the particularist eschews moral principles, basic moral facts

presumably must be facts about particular cases, e.g. that the fact that it

would promote pleasure was a reason for her in her actual circumstances.

This knowledge must not itself be based on some antecedent moral princi-

ple which would apply to other cases. Such basic moral facts are of course

contingent. It need not have been the case that her action would promote

pleasure at all, much less need it have been the case that the fact that it would promote pleasure is a reason given holism. On the plausible assumption

that knowledge of contingent facts is a posteriori, we are led to the

conclusion that knowledge of basic moral facts must itself be a posteriori

knowledge.