Chapter 3 Flashcards
According to Rachels ethical subjectivism is the idea that
our moral opinions are based on our feelings and nothing more.
According to ethical subjectivism is the idea that
there is no such thing as objective right and wrong.
According to ethical subjectivism when we say that actions are evil
we are only saying that we have negative feelings about them.
Ethical subjectivism begins with the idea of David Hume that
morality is a matter of sentiment rather than fact.
The simplest version of simple subjectivism is, when a person says something is morally bad
this means that he or she disapproves of it.
“X is morally acceptable means:
I (the speaker) approve of X.
“X is morally unacceptable means:
I (the speaker) disapprove of X.
Simple subjectivism
cannot account for disagreement.
When someone uses simple subjectivism to make a moral assessment
they are really making an assessment about their own attitudes.
If simple subjectivism is correct
we are always right about our attitudes.
With simple subjectivism so long as someone is honestly representing their feelings
their moral judgments are always correct.
One difficulty with the implication of simple subjectivism that we are always right about our attitudes is that
we are sometimes wrong in our moral evaluations.
If language is used to state facts
statements are either true or false.
According to simple subjectivism moral language is about
stating facts about a speakers attitudes.
According to Emotivism
1) moral language is not fact stating language.
2) It is a means to influence people’s attitudes.
According to Emotivism if someone says to you “Don’t do that!”
that person is trying to persuade you not to do it.
For emotivism our moral judgments cannot be criticized because
- they are not judgments at all.
2. they are an expression of the speakers attitudes.
For Stevenson moral disagreements are
are disagreements in attitudes.
For Stevenson moral disagreements are
are disagreements in attitudes.
According to Rachel’s Emotivism
does not interpret moral judgments as statements that are always true or false.
According to Rachel’s Emotivism
cannot explain the role that reason plays in ethics.
An adequate theory of ethics
should be able to explain how reasons can support moral judgments.
Insofar as moral judgments are mere expressions of attitude
they are like personal preferences.
Because emotivism is a flawed ethical theory
it casts doubt on all of ethical subjectivism
Why do people believe that moral judgments are unprovable?
When proof is demanded people often want scientific proof and ethics does not work in this way.
Why do people believe that moral judgments are unprovable?
Because 2 matters are run together, proving an opinion to be true and persuading someone to accept your proof.
According to Rachel’s moral thinking and moral conduct
are a matter of weighing reasons and being guided by them.
According to Rachel’s when we have strong feelings
we are tempted to ignore reason and go with feelings.