Subjectivism and moral skepticism challenge the idea of universal moral truths. They argue that morality is based on personal opinions or that objective moral facts don't exist. This shakes up traditional views on ethics.
These perspectives have big impacts on how we make moral choices. They can lead to or nihilism, but also promote open-mindedness. Understanding these views is key to grasping the complexities of moral philosophy.
Subjectivism and Moral Skepticism
Subjectivism: Moral Judgments Based on Personal Opinions
Top images from around the web for Subjectivism: Moral Judgments Based on Personal Opinions
Our life stories: needs, beliefs & behaviours - part two, "beliefs" | Good Medicine View original
Is this image relevant?
Moral Development | Introduction to Psychology – Lindh View original
Is this image relevant?
The three moral codes of behaviour | Clamor World View original
Is this image relevant?
Our life stories: needs, beliefs & behaviours - part two, "beliefs" | Good Medicine View original
Is this image relevant?
Moral Development | Introduction to Psychology – Lindh View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Subjectivism: Moral Judgments Based on Personal Opinions
Our life stories: needs, beliefs & behaviours - part two, "beliefs" | Good Medicine View original
Is this image relevant?
Moral Development | Introduction to Psychology – Lindh View original
Is this image relevant?
The three moral codes of behaviour | Clamor World View original
Is this image relevant?
Our life stories: needs, beliefs & behaviours - part two, "beliefs" | Good Medicine View original
Is this image relevant?
Moral Development | Introduction to Psychology – Lindh View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Subjectivism holds that moral judgments are based on personal opinions, feelings, or attitudes rather than objective facts or universal principles
This view implies that what is morally right or wrong varies from person to person, depending on their individual beliefs and values
For example, one person may believe that abortion is morally permissible based on their personal values of bodily autonomy and reproductive freedom, while another may believe it is morally wrong based on their personal values of sanctity of life and protection of the unborn
Subjectivism challenges the idea of , which holds that moral facts exist independently of human beliefs or attitudes
Moral Skepticism: Challenging the Existence of Objective Moral Truths
Moral skepticism is the view that there are no objective moral truths or that moral knowledge is impossible to attain
Moral , a form of moral skepticism, holds that all moral claims are false because they refer to non-existent moral facts or properties
For example, a moral error theorist might argue that claims like "murder is wrong" or "kindness is good" are false because there are no objective moral properties of wrongness or goodness that exist independently of human beliefs or attitudes
, another form of moral skepticism, holds that moral claims are neither true nor false but are expressions of emotions, attitudes, or prescriptions
For example, a moral non-cognitivist might argue that the statement "stealing is wrong" is not a factual claim but rather an expression of disapproval or a prescription against stealing
Moral skepticism, like subjectivism, challenges the idea of moral realism and the existence of objective moral truths
However, while subjectivism allows for individual moral truths based on personal opinions, moral skepticism denies the existence of any moral truths altogether
Arguments for and Against
Arguments Supporting Subjectivism and Moral Skepticism
The diversity of moral beliefs across cultures and individuals suggests that morality is subjective rather than objective
For example, some cultures practice arranged marriages, while others value individual choice in marriage partners; some cultures prioritize individual rights, while others prioritize communal harmony
The difficulty of resolving moral disagreements and the apparent dependence of moral judgments on emotions and attitudes support subjectivism and moral skepticism
For example, debates over controversial issues like euthanasia, animal rights, or wealth redistribution often involve conflicting moral intuitions and deeply held emotions rather than objective facts or principles
The lack of empirical evidence for moral facts and the difficulty of explaining the nature and origin of moral properties lend credence to moral skepticism
For example, while we can observe and measure physical properties like mass or temperature, it is unclear how we could observe or measure moral properties like rightness or goodness
Arguments Against Subjectivism and Moral Skepticism
The existence of widely shared moral intuitions (such as prohibitions against murder, theft, or incest) and the possibility of moral progress and convergence suggest that there may be some objective moral truths
The practical need for moral objectivity in society, such as the need for shared moral norms and principles to guide behavior and resolve conflicts, counts against subjectivism and moral skepticism
The apparent reality of moral experience, the coherence and utility of , and the negative consequences of abandoning moral objectivity for individual and social well-being provide reasons to reject moral skepticism
For example, most people seem to experience moral obligations, guilt, or indignation as real and binding, not merely as personal preferences or expressions of emotion
Moral discourse and reasoning seem to presuppose the existence of moral truths and the possibility of moral knowledge, even if these are difficult to establish conclusively
A society without any shared moral objectivity might devolve into nihilism, egoism, or "might makes right," with detrimental effects on social cooperation, individual rights, and human flourishing
Impact on Ethical Decision-Making
Implications of Subjectivism for Moral Reasoning and Behavior
Subjectivism implies that individuals are the ultimate arbiters of moral truth, leading to moral relativism and potentially undermining the authority of moral norms and principles
For example, if morality is purely subjective, then there may be no basis for criticizing or condemning the behavior of others who have different moral beliefs, such as those who engage in hate speech, discrimination, or cruelty
Subjectivism can also lead to moral uncertainty and indecision in the face of complex moral dilemmas, as there may be no objective criteria for resolving conflicting moral claims
For example, in a situation where one must choose between lying to protect someone's feelings and telling the truth to uphold honesty, a subjectivist may have difficulty determining which course of action is morally right, as both honesty and benevolence are subjectively valued moral principles
Implications of Moral Skepticism for Moral Reasoning and Behavior
Moral skepticism can lead to , the view that nothing is morally right or wrong, or moral non-cognitivism, the view that moral claims are neither true nor false
For example, if all moral claims are false or meaningless, as moral error theory suggests, then there may be no moral reasons to act one way or another, leading to amorality or arbitrary decision-making
Moral skepticism can undermine moral motivation and responsibility by denying the objective bindingness of moral obligations
For example, if moral claims are mere expressions of emotion or attitude, as moral non-cognitivism suggests, then there may be no compelling reason to follow moral norms or principles, especially when they conflict with self-interest or personal desires
Potential Benefits of Subjectivism and Moral Skepticism for Moral Reasoning
Despite their challenges to moral objectivity, subjectivism and moral skepticism can also promote moral humility, open-mindedness, and tolerance by acknowledging the diversity and fallibility of moral beliefs
For example, recognizing the subjectivity of moral judgments may lead individuals to be more receptive to alternative moral perspectives and less dogmatic about their own moral convictions
Moral skepticism can encourage critical reflection on the justification and coherence of moral beliefs, leading to more rigorous and sophisticated moral reasoning
Challenges to Universal Principles
Subjectivist and Skeptical Critiques of Moral Universalism
Subjectivism and moral skepticism challenge the idea that there are universal moral principles that apply to all people at all times, regardless of their personal opinions or cultural backgrounds
If morality is subjective or non-cognitive, as these views suggest, then there may be no objective basis for asserting the universality or authority of any particular moral principles
For example, the principle of utilitarianism (maximizing overall well-being) or Kant's categorical imperative (acting only on universalizable maxims) may be seen as reflecting particular cultural or philosophical commitments rather than objective moral truths
The diversity of moral beliefs and practices across cultures and individuals seems to support the subjectivist and skeptical challenge to moral universalism
For example, some cultures prioritize individual autonomy and rights, while others prioritize communal harmony and duties; some cultures have strict sexual codes, while others are more permissive
Universalist Responses to Subjectivist and Skeptical Challenges
Some argue that the existence of widely shared moral intuitions (such as prohibitions against murder or incest) and the practical need for moral coordination in society support the idea of universal moral principles
For example, the near-universal condemnation of genocide or the widespread acceptance of human rights suggest that there may be some common moral ground across cultures and individuals
Others argue that universal moral principles can be justified on the basis of reason, such as the Kantian categorical imperative or the utilitarian principle of maximizing overall well-being
For example, Kant argues that the categorical imperative (acting only on universalizable maxims) is a requirement of practical reason, while utilitarians argue that maximizing overall well-being is a rational imperative given the equal consideration of all sentient beings
Some universalists acknowledge the diversity of moral beliefs but argue that this reflects differences in the application or interpretation of universal principles rather than the absence of such principles altogether
For example, different cultures may have different views on what constitutes murder or what maximizes well-being, but they may still share a common commitment to the wrongness of murder or the importance of well-being
The Ongoing Debate and Its Implications for Moral Philosophy and Practice
The debate between moral universalism and subjectivism/skepticism remains ongoing in moral philosophy, with important implications for how we understand and practice ethics in a diverse and complex world
If subjectivism or skepticism is correct, then we may need to rethink the goals and methods of moral philosophy, focusing more on understanding the diversity and origins of moral beliefs rather than seeking universal moral truths
For example, moral philosophers may need to engage in more descriptive and comparative work, examining the moral beliefs and practices of different cultures and individuals and their psychological and social underpinnings
If universalism is correct, then we may need to work harder to identify and justify universal moral principles that can guide behavior and resolve conflicts across diverse contexts
For example, moral philosophers may need to engage in more normative and constructive work, developing and defending universal principles (such as human rights, the Golden Rule, or the veil of ignorance) that can serve as a common moral framework for a globalized world
Regardless of which view is correct, the subjectivist and skeptical challenges to moral universalism highlight the importance of moral humility, open-mindedness, and tolerance in a world of diverse and conflicting moral beliefs
For example, even if we believe in universal moral principles, we should be cautious about imposing them on others without understanding their cultural and individual contexts and engaging in respectful dialogue and persuasion
Key Terms to Review (17)
Argument from Queerness: The argument from queerness posits that if moral properties existed in a way that was independent of human experiences, they would be unlike anything else in the universe, which makes their existence seem odd or 'queer.' This argument is often used to challenge moral realism by suggesting that objective moral truths are implausible because they would require a unique form of existence that doesn't match our understanding of reality. This ties into broader discussions about the nature of morality and its foundations, particularly regarding whether moral truths can exist independently of individual perspectives or cultural contexts.
Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism: Cognitivism and non-cognitivism are two opposing theories in ethics regarding the nature of moral statements. Cognitivism holds that moral statements are capable of being true or false because they express beliefs or propositions about the world, while non-cognitivism argues that moral statements do not have truth values and instead express emotional attitudes or prescriptions. This fundamental divide informs discussions on subjectivism and moral skepticism by influencing how we understand the truth conditions of moral claims.
David Hume: David Hume was an 18th-century Scottish philosopher known for his influential ideas in empiricism and skepticism, particularly regarding the nature of human understanding and morality. His work laid the groundwork for modern philosophy, emphasizing that knowledge derives from sensory experiences and highlighting the distinction between descriptive statements about the world and prescriptive moral claims.
Error Theory: Error theory is the philosophical position that claims moral statements are systematically false because they assert the existence of objective moral values that do not exist. This theory challenges the foundations of moral realism by suggesting that when people make moral claims, they are fundamentally mistaken about the nature of morality. Error theory relates to various perspectives on morality, including those that debate whether moral truths are universal and objective or subjective and skeptical in nature.
Ethical subjectivism: Ethical subjectivism is the view that moral judgments are based on individual feelings, opinions, and perspectives rather than objective truths. This theory suggests that what is right or wrong varies from person to person and that there are no universal moral standards applicable to all individuals. It connects to discussions around the nature of morality and how personal beliefs influence ethical perspectives.
J.L. Mackie: J.L. Mackie was a prominent 20th-century philosopher known for his arguments against moral realism, particularly in his influential work, 'Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong.' He posited that moral values are not objective truths but rather human constructs, making him a significant figure in discussions about moral anti-realism. His views challenge the idea of universal moral truths and connect deeply with the debates on subjectivism and moral skepticism.
Moral belief: A moral belief is an individual's conviction about what is right or wrong, often grounded in personal, cultural, or societal values. These beliefs guide behavior and decision-making, influencing how one interacts with others and perceives moral dilemmas. Moral beliefs can vary widely among individuals and cultures, leading to differing opinions on ethical issues.
Moral disagreement: Moral disagreement refers to the situation where individuals or groups hold conflicting views about what is morally right or wrong. This concept is significant as it highlights the complexities of moral judgments, which can be influenced by various factors such as culture, personal beliefs, and emotional responses. Understanding moral disagreement helps in navigating debates about ethical issues, recognizing that diverse perspectives can coexist and often stem from deeper philosophical foundations.
Moral Discourse: Moral discourse refers to the process of discussing, debating, and analyzing moral issues and ethical principles through communication. This practice plays a crucial role in understanding and navigating complex moral landscapes, allowing individuals to articulate their values and beliefs while engaging with differing perspectives. It is essential for evaluating moral claims, especially in contexts where moral realism and anti-realism are at odds, or when subjective views clash with moral skepticism.
Moral judgment: Moral judgment refers to the process of evaluating actions, intentions, and character traits based on ethical principles and values. It involves determining whether something is right or wrong, good or bad, and often reflects cultural norms and individual beliefs. This term is closely linked to the way people make decisions about morality, including the influence of various ethical theories and the role of societal norms in shaping these judgments.
Moral nihilism: Moral nihilism is the philosophical belief that there are no objective moral truths or values, asserting that moral propositions are either false or meaningless. This view challenges the existence of universal moral standards, suggesting that moral claims lack inherent validity and are instead social constructs or expressions of individual preferences. Moral nihilism often aligns with skepticism about ethics and can intersect with cultural relativism and subjectivism.
Moral non-cognitivism: Moral non-cognitivism is the philosophical view that moral statements do not express propositions that can be true or false, but rather express emotional attitudes or prescriptions. This perspective emphasizes that when individuals make moral claims, they are not stating facts but rather expressing feelings or urging actions, aligning closely with subjectivism and moral skepticism, which question the objectivity and truth of moral values.
Moral Realism: Moral realism is the philosophical view that there are objective moral truths that exist independently of individual beliefs or perceptions. This perspective asserts that moral statements can be true or false based on factual conditions, much like statements in science, and it contrasts with views that deny the objectivity of morality, such as subjectivism and anti-realism. Moral realism supports the idea that ethical claims reflect real features of the world, making it essential for understanding debates about the nature of morality.
Moral Relativism: Moral relativism is the belief that moral values and judgments are not absolute but are shaped by cultural, societal, or personal circumstances. This concept highlights how different societies may have different moral standards, which can lead to varying interpretations of right and wrong based on context rather than universal truths.
No-ought-from-is: The no-ought-from-is principle asserts that one cannot derive moral prescriptions (what one ought to do) solely from descriptive statements (what is the case). This idea emphasizes the distinction between factual claims and normative claims, suggesting that ethical conclusions require additional premises beyond mere observations of the world. Understanding this concept is essential in discussions about subjectivism and moral skepticism, as it highlights the challenges of grounding moral beliefs in empirical facts.
Objectivity in Ethics: Objectivity in ethics refers to the idea that moral truths exist independently of individual beliefs or opinions, suggesting that ethical statements can be evaluated as true or false regardless of personal perspectives. This concept posits that there are universal moral principles that can be discovered and applied universally, challenging views that morality is merely subjective or relative to individual or cultural preferences.
Subjectivism vs. Objectivism: Subjectivism is the ethical theory that moral judgments are based on individual feelings, opinions, and perspectives, making morality inherently personal. In contrast, objectivism posits that moral truths exist independently of human beliefs or feelings, suggesting that certain actions are universally right or wrong regardless of individual perspectives. Understanding these concepts is crucial as they challenge the nature of moral knowledge and can lead to moral skepticism, questioning the possibility of knowing moral truths.