CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

The Moral Problem

Open-knowledge reference entry

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJul 2, 2026
Entity authorityQ124638787 ↗
Source-derived summary

The Moral Problem is a 1994 book by Michael Andrew Smith, in which the author tries to provide a defense of moral realism.

It is Smith’s most influential work for which he was awarded an American Philosophical Association book prize in 2001.

Reception

The book was reviewed by James Dreier, David Copp and James Lenman.

It has more than four thousand citations on Google Scholar.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “The Moral Problem” as open-knowledge reference entry. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1994, 2001—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Moral, Problem and Open-knowledge can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as open-knowledge reference entry. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 2, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q124638787. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1994 and 2001.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “The Moral Problem”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow The Moral Problem primary sources, The Moral Problem archive and Moral research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “The Moral Problem”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “The Moral Problem” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.