I.

Name Plate

Baao Community College

San Juan, Baao, Camarines Sur
College of Education

Name/s :
ALCANTARA, ANNABELLE
CAMPARICIO, FRANCIA
LARESMA, JONNA MAE
PALENCIA, CINDY
SERNAL, ANGEL AUBREY S.

S/T/R/D : PROPOSITION, TRUTH, MORAL PROPOSITION

7:30-10:30 pm/ Moral Issues & Concerns in Contemporary World
(MC VED 7)/Sunday
Topics : PROPOSITION, TRUTH, MORAL PROPOSITION
Instructor : Mr. Raph Anthony Ramos

II. Objectives

At the end of the report, the learners should be able to:

1. Understand the proposition, truth, and moral proposition.
2. Identify the role and arguments of the proposition
3. Answer the given questions/quiz.

III. Definition of Terms

For better explication and understanding of the concepts/terms linked to this study,
the following terms are clarified conceptually and operationally.

✔ Arguments: the act or process of arguing, reasoning, or discussing especially oral

argument.
✔ Bearers- a person whose job is to carry something or a person who brings a
message
✔ Ethics - the discipline concerned with what is morally good and bad and morally
right and wrong.
✔ History- The bodies of knowledge about the past produced by historians, together
with everything that is involved in the production, communication of, and teaching
about that knowledge.
✔ Modality- is the way or mode in which something exists or is done.
✔ Metalinguistic- a branch of linguistics that deals with the relation between language
and other cultural factors in a society.
✔ Metaphysics- is a type of philosophy or study that uses broad concepts to help
define reality and our understanding of it.
✔ Moral- concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness
or badness of human character.
 ✔ Philosophy - the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and
existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline.
✔ Proposition- a statement or problem that must be solved or proved to be true or not
true
✔ Robust- Insensitivity of a process output to the variation of the process inputs.
✔ Systematic- is something done according to a specific system, plan or method.
✔ Stipulation- a condition or requirement that is specified or demanded as part of an
agreement.
✔ Theories- a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something,
especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.
✔ Terminology- the body of terms used with a particular technical application in a
subject of study, profession, etc.

IV. Summary of the Report

According to Matthew McGrath and Devin Frank, The term 'proposition' has a
broad use in contemporary philosophy It is used to refer to some or all of the
following: the primary bearers of truth-value, the objects of belief, and other
"propositional attitude the referents of that-clauses, and the meanings of
sentences. Propositions, we will say, are the sharable objects of attitudes and the
primary bearers of truth and falsity.
This stipulation rules out specific candidates for propositions, including
thought- and utterance-tokens, which presumably are not sharable, and concrete
events or facts, which presumably cannot be false. Propositions are also
commonly treated as the meanings or, to use the more standard terminology, the
semantic contents of sentences, and so are commonly taken to be central to
semantics and the philosophy of language. However, there is room for doubt
about whether propositions are the right sort of entity for the job. Here is why.
Note that a sentence would appear to contribute the same content regardless of
whether it occurs as a proper part of a larger sentence.
Traditional theories of truth hold that truth has only a single uniform nature. All
truths are true in the same way. More recent deflationary theories claim that truth
has no nature at all; the concept of truth is of no real philosophical importance. In
this concise and clearly written book, Lynch argues that we should reject both
these extremes and hold that truth is a functional property.
To understand truth, we must understand what it does, and its function in our
cognitive economy. Once we understand that, we'll see that this function can be
performed in more than one way. And that in turn opens the door to an appealing
 pluralism: beliefs about the concrete physical world needn't be true in the same way
as our thoughts about matters -- like morality -- where the human stain is deepest

Ethical sentences express propositions that refer to objective features of the

word. That is, features independent of subjective opinion, some of which may be
true to the extent that they report those features accurately. This makes moral
realism a non-nihilist form of ethical cognitivism which accepts that ethical
sentences express propositions and can therefore be evaluated as true or false
with an ontological orientation, standing in opposition to all forms of moral anti-
realism and moral skepticism, including ethical subjectivism which denies that
moral propositions refer to objective facts, error theory which denies that any
moral propositions are true; and non-cognitivism which denies that moral
sentences express propositions at all.
Moral propositions are true when actions and other objects of moral
assessment have the relevant moral properties so that the relevant moral facts
obtain, where these facts and properties are robust: their metaphysical status,
whatever it is, is not relevantly different from that of ordinary non-moral facts and
properties.

V. Review of Related Literature

The proposition of p is true if p can be thought to capture our conception of truth only
if the truth is not already presupposed in the very idea of the proposition. but this
requirement may well be violated for a central component of the notion of the proposition is
lodged in the statement of identity condition for propositions the condition for the two
utterances to express the same proposition.

Many philosophers would agree that if a proposition exists then propositional truth
would be covered by something like the equivalence schema but they might still maintain
that the truth of an utterance consists in its correspondence with reality or some other
substantive thing.

According to the theory, normative claims express a proposition that entails,

nontrivially, that relevant standards have an appropriate status. the nature of this status
depends on the kind of normative claims in question, in the case of moral claims, the status
is itself normative, the moral proposition is true only if the corresponding standard is
appropriately justified.

The proposition is a highly dubious entity. it is unclear what they are supposed to be,
and their very existence is controversial. It would not be better, therefore, to develop a
theory of the truth that does not presuppose them by assuming for example that utterances
are the primary bearers of truth.

The standard-based theory implies that normativity is internal to the moral

proposition in the paradigmatic moral proposition entailing nontrivially that related moral
standard is justified. but nothing about anyone's actual motivations need to be entailed by a
moral proposition, or by someone believing a moral proposition.

VI. Educational Caricature

How do you make your moral decisions? I’m not asking which things you think are good
and which things you think are bad. I’m asking what factors you consider, and what is the
process by which you consider them when you are trying to figure out what is right or
wrong, good, or bad.

To get a glimpse of a number of major considerations one encounters when

attempting to consciously craft meta-ethics that work with one’s own values and
perspectives and experiences. In this picture, the hero’s old professor (black hair) is drawn
coat-on to represent one side of an ethical debate while the professor is drawn coat-off to
represent the other side of the same debate. Our Hero is drawn in the middle of this debate,
focused on listening.

They are arguing for considering factors other than results, but the argument is that if
we fail to examine the means and not merely the results, then we will end up with bad
results.

If in the process of making your decisions, you decide you don’t want to break a moral
rule, but you don’t actively consider the consequences of breaking the rule, then your
decision-making process is simply fundamentally different. You look to present rules while
others look to the future and imagine possible consequences.

VII. Conclusions

➢ The primary bearers of truth-value. When we first introduced propositions as the

items which are the bearers of truth-values, we said that propositions must be
distinguished from the sentences which may be used to express them in much
the same way as numbers must be distinguished from the numerals which may
be used to express them.

➢ Saying that “the conception we associate with the word ‘proposition’ may be
something of a jumble of conflicting desiderata,” Thus the means on what we
desired.

➢ To form this stipulation rules out specific candidates for propositions, including
thought- and utterance-tokens, which presumably are not sharable, and
concrete events or facts, which presumably cannot be false.

➢ Propositions are also commonly treated as the meanings or, to use the more
standard terminology, the semantic contents of sentences, and so are
commonly taken to be central to semantics and the philosophy of language.

➢ To understand truth, we must understand what it does, and its function in our
cognitive economy.

➢ Ethical sentences express propositions that refer to objective features of the

word.

➢ Therefore, features independent of subjective opinion, some of which may be

true to the extent that they report those features accurately.
VIII. Recommendations

➢ Be thought to capture our conception of truth only if the truth is not already
presupposed in the very idea of the proposition.

➢ Recognize every decision you make. Ensure to capture all conception in a consistent
definition.

➢ Identity condition for propositions to condition for the two utterances to express the
same proposition.

➢ Maintain that the truth of an utterance consists in its correspondence with reality or
some other substantive thing.

➢ Develop a theory of the truth that does not presuppose them by assuming for example:
the utterances are the primary bearers of truth.

➢ Look to present rules while others look to the future and imagine possible
consequences.
IX. Bibliography

 Dyke, H. (2003). What moral realism can learn from the philosophy of time. In Time
andEthics: Essays at the Intersection (pp. 11-25). Springer, Dordrecht.

 Lynch, Michael P. (2009).Truth as One and Many. Clarendon Press.

 Nicholas J. J. Smith, Truth as One and Many

By Michael Lynch, Analysis, Volume 70, Issue 1, January 2010, Pages
191–193,[Link]

 McGrath, Matthew and Devin Frank, "Propositions", The Stanford

Encyclopedia ofPhilosophy (Winter 2020 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),
URL =
<[Link]

 Horwich, P. (1998). Truth. Clarendon Press.

 Potter, N. (1997). The Synthetic a priori Proposition of Kant's Ethical Philosophy.

JRE, 5,437.

SUBMITTED TO:
MR. RAPH ANTHONY RAMOS

SUBMITTED BY:
Group 4
ALCANTARA, ANNABELLE
CAMPARICIO, FRANCIA
LARESMA, JONNA MAE
PALENCIA, CINDY
SERNAL, ANGEL AUBREY S.