Ethical Subjectivism: Infallible Moral Judgments

This paper is going to discuss Ethics and Ethical Theories. It will include an introduction to ethical theories, virtue ethics, and care ethics. There will be sections discussing absolutism versus relativism, consequentialism versus deontological ethics, and lastly, free will versus determinism. It will also include a discussion about the study of morality and identify which of the approaches (Scientific, Philosophical, or Theological/Religious) are closest to my own personal beliefs. There will be a discussion regarding the three sources of ethics

"Moral Objectivism: The view that what is right or wrong doesn"t depend on what anyone thinks is right or wrong. That is, the view that the 'moral facts ' are like 'physical ' facts in that what the facts are does not depend on what anyone thinks they are. Objectivist theories tend to come in two sorts:"(1)

The second chapter of the book covers three moral views – objectivism, relativism, and emotivism. Objectivism is the view that some moral principles are valid for everyone. For example, according to an objectivist moral view torturing people is not acceptable universally. The second moral view is relativism. There are two types of relativism: cultural relativism, which approves an action if it is morally right to one’s culture; and subjective relativism – the view that an action is right if one approves of it (Vaughan 20). For example, some cultures support the sex-selective apportion, because female babies are not encouraged (Sex-Selection). If a group of people believe it is right, then

Louis Vaughn states that the purpose of morality is not to describe how things are, but to “prescribe how things should be” (2). In Philosophy, moral relativism and moral objectivism are two conflicting but somewhat overlapping school of thought. These beliefs govern the way an individual acts; they also decide the ethical guidelines from which the law is written. In this essay we will delineate the differences between the two sects of belief.

The idea of values merely being subjective are a denial of the need and possibility of morality. Consequently, if morality is not present there will be no need to determine which values should be accepted as well as an acceptable standard of how an individual should act. Emotions are left to rule over to make the decisions. Where no moral judgement is practised then justice is impossible and crimes cannot be punished. This journal article further illustrates the problem with ethical subjectivism. If subjective preferences determine our ethical conceptions then no conception is inferior or superior to the other. However as we attempt to determine what constitutes an ethical conduct we do in fact find that certain ethical conceptions are superior to others. For example, in the context of the holocaust, we deem the sanctity of human life and non-discrimination as superior over the preservation and propagation of the Aryan race. Within Chapter 2 Lewis highlights one of the most intriguing aspects of human nature is that morals do not change but rather, they evolve. The sympathies of the average person have substantially grown within modern society as opposed to the past hundred years. There is now a significant development in the moral beliefs regarding issues such as the rights of women, racial discrimination, child labour and the abuse of animals for public entertainment. The main reason for this advancement in our moral view of society is our contact and association with other people. When we share common interests with others and strive towards one goal we are able to extend our affection to others as we share in their human nature. Even an increase in travel and the access to international communication has allowed us to encounter more people than any other generation in history. The conclusion of part 3 of the

To thoroughly understand subjectivism, it is important to consider how we decide what ethical views to agree with. When faced with two different ethical views, we gather our knowledge and experiences of each of the views together and compare them. Then we use our best judgement on the comparison to choose the ethical view that aligns most with our knowledge and experience. According to subjectivism, the view we choose becomes morally right for us (Shafer-Landau, 296). Further, it is important to note that our knowledge and experiences regarding ethical views can change over time. This means that our approval of an ethical view can change as well.

There are many things in this world that many people have very strong opinions on, such as same-sex marriage, abortion, and gun control. People have these opinions and they think that the opinions that they hold are right. Ethical subjectivism states have everyone has different opinions, but there are no “facts” when morality is involved. As a result, no one is “right.” For example, in the book Matt Foreman approves of being gay while Michele Bachmann disapprove of being gay. When it is put like this, the two people who have completely different options on people being gay cannot argue that the other person accepts or does not accept people being gay according to Subjectivism. This is what the authors of the book were trying to get say is that subjectivism is flawed.

Emotivism by definition is theory about the use of the meaning of sentences used in moral utterance. It is the expression of feelings or attitude as the function of the meaning of sentences, rather than the actual meaning behind what is said. Alasdiar MacIntyre, in his book, After Virtue, focuses on how emotivism has corrupted modern philosophy into, “nothing but expressions of preference, expressions of attitude or feeling" (11-12). The purpose of this essay is to summarize and analyze the claims made in the formation of modern ethics and critique of philosophical history in After Virtue.

A resident advisor in the dormitories of a college might think it is their moral obligation to write their peers up for underage drinking. I might believe that underage drinking is a victimless crime and a resident advisor’s moral duty is to only write up students for the destruction of property or if they are disturbing others. Here we have two different people with differing viewpoints. The two parties would both like to believe that they have the moral ground on their side, but is there a set moral code or law that would define one of these choices as right, and one as wrong, of course not. The sole way to explain these inconsistent moral views is with moral subjectivism. Each individual is using their own moral compass to guide the decisions they make. Each and every person is entitled to believe what they want to in the case of right or wrong. Something I might consider to be morally justified, might spark volatile disagreement from others. Even

Subjectivism clenches that there are no objective ethical properties and that ethical statements are in fact arbitrary because they do not express unchangeable truths. Instead, moral declarations are made true or false by the attitudes or conventions of the spectators, and any ethical sentence just implies an attitude, opinion, personal preference or feeling held by someone. Thus, for a statement to be considered morally right hardly means that it is met with a green light by the person of interest. Another way of examine this is that judgments about human conduct are form by, and in many ways restricted to, perception or cultural believes.

When people hear the term “ethics,” most of their minds turn to dilemmas discussed by figures such as Immanuel Kant, Jeremy Bentham, Aristotle, and other famous philosophers. These men debated what is considered to be morally good and how a person can become ethical. Operating under normative ethics, these philosophers did not question whether or not ethics even existed, but rather if they exist, what are they? The branch of ethics that questions the foundation of ethics and morality is metaethics. There are three standpoints when debating metaethics: moral realism, moral relativism, and moral skepticism. I will be discussing my argument for moral realism and contend that moral relativism and skepticism are inaccurate. I will prove the

There are many differences between Simple Subjectivism and Emotivism. This paper will compare and contrast both theories, as well as explain why Simple Subjectivism cannot explain moral disagreement, and Emotivism can but incorrectly. By arguing these two ethical views, I can better explain or make a claim on how one ought to understand occurrences of moral

Subjectivism on the other hand is the “feelings” of the person in question. So whatever I feel about a moral dilemma is right. So; because, I feel beating babies is morally right then well that is just that. I am correct in my view because that is how I feel. What I feel is what makes it morally right or wrong “ it is all just subjective”. The difference in the two Arguments on morality is that one is related to what the culture believes, and the other is what each individual person believes.

3. Ethical subjectivism makes us morally infallible by making morality “in the eye of the beholder,” which pretty much would lead us to believe that every individual is morally right. But this is simply cannot be true since that would mean that an individual’s thinking could be based off bias, prejudice, ignorance, etc. and still not be mistaken.

Cultural and ethical relativisms are widely used theories that explain differences among cultures and their ethics and morals. Morality deals with individual character and the moral rules that are meant to govern and limit one’s character. On the other hand Ethics is somewhat interchangeable with morals, but it actually defines the principles of right conduct, thus to some extent, enlarging its scope to a societal or communal level. Ideally, ethics play a vital role in determining the dos and don’ts when dealing with the society. This essay will discuss what ethical realism is, analyzing why ethical relativism is unsound and unreliable in relation to the relevant evidence and literature, providing valid reason to ascertain why this is the case.