Argument For Moderate Objectivism

2506 Words11 Pages
An argument for ethical objectivism would be Pojman and Fieser’s moderate objectivism. According to them, a moral claim is objectively true when it describes an objective moral principle. An objective moral principle is a rule that, if generally followed, would optimally perform the function of serving human needs and interests by reducing harmful social conflict and promoting beneficial social cooperation. (Luco, Week 6 Notes p.1)
This is the reconstruction of Pojman and Fieser’s Argument for Moderate Objectivism
1. Common human nature: Human nature is relatively similar in the sense that human beings have a common set of basic needs and interest
2. Functionality Thesis: Moral principles are instituted to perform the function of meeting
…show more content…
In addition, careful analysis of simple moral principles can also lead to the conclusion that the functionality thesis is true. Using the example that we should keep our promises to people as a moral principle, Pojman and Fieser do mention that if a world were to cease obeying it, contracts and agreements would no longer hold any value. (Luco, Week 6 Notes, p.11) It is not difficult to imagine that in many societies where transactions and contracts are made daily, from bank loans to bicycle rentals, without the moral principle of keeping promises and honouring contracts, the individuals who enter into an agreement would no longer see the need to honour their contracts. As a result, business would fail and chaos would ensue in the society. Further empirical evidence can be seen from Steven Pinker’s research from “A History of Violence” was conducted over different time periods and it also supports the functionality thesis in the sense that people with stronger reasoning abilities do construct practices and institutions to meet their interest. (Luco, Week 6 Notes, p.

More about Argument For Moderate Objectivism

Get Access