phil assignment 3 (1)
.pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Calgary *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
249
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
Pages
7
Uploaded by MasterIceGazelle28
Morality is more a matter of taste than truth
The nature of morality has been a subject of philosophical inquiry for centuries, and one
of the key debates is whether moral values are objective or subjective. Perry (2000) describes the
concept of morality to be understood as a complex and multifaceted phenomenon encompassing
a range of norms, values, virtues and duties for individuals. Subjective morality is the idea that
moral values and principles are ultimately based on personal opinions and individual
preferences, rather than objective standards that exist independently of human experience. On the
other hand, objective morality indicates that moral standards and values exist independently of
individual beliefs, emotions, or cultural norms (Dorsey, 2017) This essay delves into the
arguments for morality as taste and truth, considering the role of cultural relativism and
intuitionism. Moreover, it explores the critiques of objective and subjective morality,
highlighting the difficulties in determining objective moral truths and the potential drawbacks of
subjective morality. Ultimately suggesting that morality does not have a black-and-white answer,
and a more nuanced and integrated approach combining subjectivity and objectivity better
recognises the complexity of the moral experience (Zimmerman, 2006).
The importance of moral subjectivity has been supported by several philosophers and
theorists, including Douglas Adams (2018) who highlighted the importance of exploring the
impact that taste and cultural context have in forming moral judgements. Moral values are
influenced by cultural, social, and personal factors that shape our individual experiences and
perspectives. Asserting that people can have different and even conflicting views on moral issues
and that there is no universal or objective standard that can judge them.
Another argument for this perspective is cultural relativism, stating that moral values are
determined by cultural norms and practices, and may vary from culture to culture (Wolff, 2020).
Rachels (2018) notes that moral values are not objective features of the world, but rather are
products of human subjectivity and cultural context. This subjectivity can be endorsed by
intuitionism, which suggests that moral judgments are based on individual emotional responses
to moral situations, rather than objective moral principles (LaFollette and Persson, 2013).
Individuals’ moral values are not fixed and unchanging, but rather can evolve based on personal
experiences, across different cultures and societies. As Richard Rorty (1998) argues, moral
progress is not a matter of discovering objective moral truths, but rather a matter of changing
attitudes and values over time. This view challenges the idea that there are objective moral
standards that hold across all cultures and societies. Saptontzis (2012) analyzed the implications
of subjective morality in many instances and found there are some challenges, but ultimately
determined it offers potential benefits in terms of flexibility and autonomy. This is because it
provides a flexible and adaptable approach to moral issues, which can lead to greater moral
autonomy as individuals are encouraged to develop their own values rather than relying on
external authority.
Proponents of moral objectivity argue that some actions are inherently right or wrong,
regardless of personal opinions or cultural norms (Sapontzis, 2012). In today's society, it is
widely accepted that murder, torture, and slavery are universally considered to be morally wrong,
regardless of cultural differences or individual experiences. This suggests that some moral values
are universally accepted, regardless of culture, and personal beliefs. It can be argued that moral
subjectivism undermines the notion of moral responsibility. Maintaining that morality is
objective, provides the ability to hold individuals accountable for their actions by having
universally set standards to judge right from wrong, providing a basis of responsibility and
accountability to one another.
Philosophers often support morality as a truth because it provides a framework to
evaluate and justify moral claims, allowing for moral progress (
Rescher, 2008)
. Without an
objective framework, there would be no method to determine what moral choice is better than
another, making it impossible to improve and make progress. It also allows for resolution of
moral disputes and provides a foundation for discussion and education. This argument would
deem moral discussion to be a meaningless exchange of subjective opinions, halting all progress.
We must ask ourselves if the ease of making a decision is worth discrediting the role of personal
experiences when discussing moral values? Some philosophers align with objectivity due to the
idea that moral judgements are grounded in humans' basic needs and interests (Lear, 1984). Lear
argues there are objective facts about what is good or bad for a human based on biological and
psychological makeup. While there is no denying that it is objectively good to have food and
shelter, this thinking will not be a foolproof approach to morality.
Critiques of both objective and subjective theories of morality have been thoroughly
explored in the field of philosophy, highlighting its complexities. Objectivists claim that there are
moral truths, independent of personal beliefs or opinions. However, the challenge lies in
determining what those objective moral truths are and how to discover them. The idea of
objective moral standards itself is a problematic concept, if they exist they would be inaccessible
and unknown to mankind (Sapontzis, 2012). If moral truth is determined by a group of
individuals, how do we determine that it is not a subjective standard molded by their personal
experiences? On the contrary, if morality is subjective how do we justify inherently wrong
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help