Ayer 's Philosophical View : Emotivism Vs. Subjectivism
1026 Words5 Pages
Emotivism vs. Subjectivism In this paper I will look at how Ayer’s philosophical view of Emotivism avoids Moore’s objection. Therefore showing that Ayer’s view is not only different from Subjectivism but is also more plausible because the “ethical” statements that are put out by Emotivism cannot be empirically tested and also because the intent behind making Emotive philosophical statements is to influence the thoughts or behaviors or one’s audience rather than just giving facts. Subjectivism is the idea that ethics are reduced to the psychological state of the individual. Thus it is the act of reporting one’s own thoughts on a subject without expressing ones feelings like Emotivism. This means that moral claims in Subjectivism allow for truth and falsity as well as moral belief and knowledge. The difference between Emotivism and Subjectivism is that in Subjectivism each person is stating their own personal feelings in regards to a situation; therefore there is nothing to argue about. On the other hand since people disagree on issues, Subjectivism cannot be all encompassing so this is where Emotivism comes in. Subjectivism does not theorize about rather something is good or bad or what moral philosophies and ideas we should adhere to, but that no matter what a person 's morals, they are only expressing their own beliefs regarding the subject using moral language.