Richard Boyd and Robert Adams have both developed semantic accounts of moral terms based on Hilary Putnam's causal regulation theory for natural kind terms, according to which the terms in question refer to the properties which predominantly causally regulated the terms. However, Terence Horgan and Mark Timmons have mounted an objection to Boyd's semantics—their Moral Twin Earth argument. If this argument is successful against Boyd then it might be thought that it should also be successful against Adams, given the similarity between their semantic accounts. I will argue in this essay that Adams's semantics is sufficiently different from Boyd's to enable him to survive Moral Twin Earth, but that he is vulnerable to a modified version of Moral Twin Earth that I describe.

中文翻译：

---

罗伯特亚当斯能在道德双生地球上生存吗？

理查德·博伊德 (Richard Boyd) 和罗伯特·亚当斯 (Robert Adams) 都基于希拉里·普特南 (Hilary Putnam) 对自然种类术语的因果调节理论发展了道德术语的语义解释，根据该理论，所讨论的术语指的是主要对术语进行因果调节的属性。然而，特伦斯·霍根和马克·蒂蒙斯对博伊德的语义——他们的道德双地球论点提出了反对意见。如果这个论点对博伊德是成功的，那么鉴于他们的语义描述之间的相似性，可能会认为它对亚当斯也应该是成功的。我将在本文中争辩说，亚当斯的语义与博伊德的语义完全不同，使他能够在道德双生地球中幸存下来，但他容易受到我所描述的道德双生地球的修改版本的影响。