"Normative ethical subjectivism" and the four arguments aganist it with examples

There are many meta-ethics concepts in philosophy that help deal with common objection and disparagement between certain situations and topics. The first meta-ethics concept is Ethical Objectivism. Ethical objectivism is a view where an action is deemed right or wrong without the opinion and thoughts of an individual. The three main branches of ethical objectivism that will be discussed in the following passages are moral universalism, moral realism and moral absolutism. The next meta-ethics concept is ethical subjectivism. Subjectivism states that a claim is dependent on a persons opinions and beliefs. Lastly, the third and final meta-ethics concept is ethical relativism. Relativism involves culture. The following will reveal objectivism, subjectivism and relativism and the ramifications of history, strength and weaknesses of these three meta-ethics concepts.

All the ethical theories are going to be defined using The Philosopher’s Way by John Chaffee. Chaffee defines ethical subjectivism as, “The view that the ultimate moral authority is the individual or the ‘subject’” (386). Next,

What “ought” you do? Such a simple question can and most likely would have several answers depending on who you asked. This simple question can be answered using philosophical ethics but more specifically meta and normative-ethics. Meta-ethics is understanding the nature of our moral thought and/or language whereas normative-ethics is evaluating the competing theories about what grounds morality. Here we will use the following normative and meta-ethics to discover how moral realism, moral anti-realism, and cultural relativism can all change what a person or a society believes they “ought” to do to be morally right.

"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)

Normative ethics takes on a more practical task, which is to arrive at moral standards that regulate right

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.

They are preconventional, conventional and post conventional. Two types of moral theory are moral relativists which claim that people create reality and that there are no universal or shared moral principles that apply to all and moral universalists, which claim that there are universal moral principles that apply to all. The idea that morality is universal is deontology. Deontology claims that duty is the foundation of morality and that moral principles apply to everyone. The categorical imperative in the main concept of this theory. It states that “Act only on that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” Virtue ethics are a part of the idea that morality is universal. Virtue ethics emphasizes character over right

Normative Ethics – a discipline of philosophy that focuses on the study of ethical action

We all know that being violent towards a child is wrong no matter where you are from. Nobody should put their hands on a child or do anything sexual to a child. What is wrong with ethical subjectivism is that there would use this example and say that your opinion on child abuse is your opinion and child abuse is neither “right” or “wrong.” When you think of this example, you can see the flaws of ethical subjectivism.

In a world of many cultures, beliefs, and varying society’s all across our known world, different people hold very different moral standards. Moral subjectivism, the idea that there is no moral law and that all actions, right or wrong are dependent on the person making the judgement, is the only explanation which can account for the diverse moral views that are so prevalent across the globe for billions of people. There is no known absolute law which is universal across the cosmos let alone the earth, as a result all morality is relative.

‘Ethical theories are the rules and principles that determine right and wrong for any given situation’ according to Crane and Matten (2004:76). Its contribution is either relativists which is what is right or wrong relying on the moral norms of our society such as, our culture or absolutists which is deciding what is right or wrong regarding the act, for instance, murder. However, absolutists are divided into Consequentialists (Teleological) which consists of Utilitarianism and ethical egoism and the Non-consequential (Deontological) which consists of divine command theories, Kant’s ethics of duty, virtue ethics, justice approach and the rights approach.

Ruth Benedict and Ethical Relativism Ethical relativism is an ethical theory that believes that while morals do exist, they depend on each individual culture. This theory also rests on a few moral ideas, the first being that the majority rules. This means that whatever belief the majority of people in a particular society have (which is probably law) is considered morally right. The second point is that what may be considered morally right in one culture may not be right in another.

To begin, the term moral subjectivism implies that beliefs are individualized and correct for the said individual. In essence, there is no “real” definitive truth that can be applied to moral sentences or beliefs. For example, two people can have beliefs about the number 13 (or number 4 in the Chinese culture) One highly religious person can believe it’s the devil’s number and will lead to murder, chaos, and violence and for another person, possibly of a different moral code or of time period, (such as the ancient Egyptians), it can be their lucky or spiritual number. Our text provides four reasons for supporting moral subjectivism. These reasons include: The fact that feelings are subjective, often disagreed on, and no one feeling or belief

A discussion of moral theories must begin with a discussion of the two extremes of ethical thinking, absolutism and relativism. Moral Absolutism is the belief that there are absolute standards where moral questions are judged and can be deemed right or wrong, regardless of the context. Steadfast laws of the universe, God, nature itself are the forces that deem an action right or wrong. A person’s actions rather than morals and motivations are important in an Absolutism proposition. Moral Relativism states, that the moral propositions are based on Ethical relativism is the theory that holds that morality is relative to the norms of one's culture. That is, whether an action is right or wrong depends on the

This is a doctrine that bases its arguments in the fact that there are no universal absolute truths in ethics and that what is morally right or wrong varies from person to person or from society to society. Ethical relativism is a similar concept, based specifically on the ethics of a culture and how they are related to those of other cultures (Kluckhohn, 2011). Herodotus, the Greek historian advanced this view when he observed that different societies have different customs and that each person thinks that his customs are