Ethical Subjectivism

Question 0

Essay that looks at arguments that might “motivate” the subjectivist view. Agrees that having a right to an opinion does not necessarily make the opinion a plausible one

Answer 0

Russ Shafer-Landau

Question 1

An action is morally right (for an individual) if and only if that individual approves of it

Answer 1

normative subjectivist

Question 2

If everyone has an equal right to have and voice moral opinions, then everyone’s moral opinions are equally plausible

Answer 2

Argument from Democracy (argument for subjectivism)

Question 3

If there is persistent disagreement among reasonable people about some subject matter, then that subject matter does not admit of objective truth

Answer 3

Argument from Disagreement (argument for subjectivism)

Question 4

Subjectivism -> No one’s ethical opinions are more plausible than anyone else’s -> We have to respect and tolerate everyone’s opinions

Answer 4

Argument from Tolerance (support of subjectivism)

Question 5

If ethics is objective, then God must exist. God does not exist, therfore, ethics is not objective

Answer 5

Argument from Atheism (in support of subjectivism)

Question 6

Question asked: Is X good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is good?

Answer: Only reasonable answer is that X is good BEFORE God commands it

Thus, if there is no good “prior to” God, then God cannot have any reasons for saying X is good rather than bad. So God’s choice of what is good is arbitrary. Such an arbitrary choice cannot provide a basis for ethics

Answer 6

Russ Shafer-Landau

Question 7

Which is the right relation?

God proclaims “X is good” -> X is good
X is good -> God proclaims “X is good”

Answer 7

Euthyphro question

Question 8

What counts as right varies not from individual to individual, but from society to society

Answer 8

cultural relativism

Question 9

A theory about ethical theories

Answer 9

meta-ethical theory

Question 10

All ethical theories that say “Moral judgments are true or false” are wrong

Answer 10

emotivism

Question 11

Every moral judgment motivates all by itself. (judgments of what’s right and wrong have the power by themselves to move people to act in certain ways)
Factual judgments cannot motivate all by themselves
Therefore moral judgments are not factual judgments

Answer 11

Hume’s argument from Moral Motivation (why be an emotivist, part I)

Question 12

We should believe the theory that explains the most with the fewest assumptions. Emotivism explains all moral judgments without assuming there to be moral facts

Answer 12

Argument from Economy

Question 13

Objective theories have to explain what moral facts are - they seem “odd,” unlike any other fact about the world. Emotivism has no explanatory burden

Answer 13

“argument” from oddness

Question 14

Moral facts are facts about the natural world. So all we have to do is examine the world to see when an act is right or wrong

Answer 14

ethical naturalist

Question 15

Moral facts are NOT facts about the natural world

Answer 15

ethical non-naturalist

Question 16

Moral disagreement is a conflict in attitudes toward some act
Moral judgments are expressions of taste, none necessarily better than any other
There is no reason to choose one ethical outlook over another
No moral truth -> no moral knowledge

Answer 16

Implications of emotivism