Mackie's Theory Of Ethical Objectivism

675 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Similarity and difference between morality and ethics

Everyone has some kind of doubt about morality. When we make a moral judgement we believe this has to have some objective background to make it true and Mackie argues that this is false. Basically, when we are making a claim we are in error which is why his theory is called the “error theory”. (Class notes, pg.16)Mackie believes that there are two important arguments to prove to you that there is no such thing as ethical objectivism.
It is very common for us to base our decisions depending on our values and what we believe is right or wrong. Most of us believe this is the right approach to making our daily choices, but Mackie believes this should be questioned, which leads us to his first argument that is called “The argument from Relativity”. This argument lets us know how every culture, society, etc. can change their view on their moral codes as time passes and how every group has its different moral beliefs. He gives us an example of how scientists can find objective issues on a daily basis which lead to some kind of disagreement that begins with a hypotheses based on some kind of evidence.( Russ Shafer-Landau E.L, 176) Which is
Even though there are many arguments against these theories, there are many points that support it. There is no such thing as ethical objectivism because as said in “The argument of Relativity”, every society around the world has different beliefs and ways of acting. Not everyone shares the same opinion. As said in “The Argument of Queerness”, we would not able to understand these objective values because we would need to have some type of power that is not in our ordinary accounts of sensory perception so this means we are incapable of understanding them. We also know that we make decisions not only based on our moral values but on the experiences we have been through time. In the end, I still believe Mackie is correct and there are no objective

Show More
Related

  • The Ethics of Belief by William Clifford: The Moral Obligation to Justify Your Beliefs

    683 Words  | 2 Pages

    Clifford makes a very strong and valid case for justifying every decision, regardless of how insignificant. Using his view of thinking, it is easy to understand why everyone has a moral right to justify decisions. Without the cooperation of society in making every decision a justified one, it is useless to hold someone accountable for an immoral belief.

    Read More

  • What Does Julia Annas Mean By The Computer Manual Model Of Moral Decision Making

    1044 Words  | 3 Pages

    The ‘computer manual’ model is what Annas uses to describe our moral decision making. Annas says in regards to this:

    Read More

  • Natural Law Theory and The Doctrine of Double Effect Theory: Thomas Aquinas

    590 Words  | 2 Pages

    The difference between absolutism and objectivism is that where objectivists believe that there are universal moral principles in which people of all ethical backgrounds and cultures have the validity to follow, absolutists believe that there are underlying values within these beliefs that strictly cannot ever be over-ridden, violated or broken under any circumstances (REF). Furthermore, while absolutists believe in this notion that moral principles are ‘exception-less’, objectivists strongly follow the notion that life is situational and that we as humans have to adapt accordingly to the variables that arise, take them into account, and then make a decision accordingly (REF). Within this introduction of variables applicable to any situation, it is therefore believed that each moral principle must be weighed against each other to produce the best possible outcome, and this is where the overriding of values occurs in an objectivists view, and where an absolutist would disregard these circumstances.

    Read More

  • Values In John Ludwig Mackie's Inventing Right And Wrong

    749 Words  | 2 Pages

    According to Mackie, objective values are considered as primary qualities, which are independent. Objective values are queer because they are not connected to the natural world. Thus, they do not exist in the world. Nevertheless, McDowell argues that values are actually secondary qualities. Specifically, secondary qualities are connected to observers, and depend on observers’ perceptual sensations, while primary qualities such as shapes can be described without any perceiving agent. Although objective values cannot be described by some sort of entities or qualities, they can be perceived by suitably sensitive observers in suitable conditions. Hence, objective values do exist when there are perceivers of these values. Again, take cruelty as an example. Mackie claims that cruelty and wrongness are not connected. However, McDowell would say that since people perceive cruelty, through their sensitive perceptions, they interpret cruelty as wrong. Perceivers act as an interpreting agent, thus giving objectivity to moral

    Read More

  • J.L. Mackie's Evil and Omnipotence

    1664 Words  | 4 Pages

    A second and stronger objection to Mackie’s version of the problem of evil is explained to us using the terms 1st and 2nd order goods and evils. 1st order goods/evils are purely physical. Examples are pleasure and pain, happiness and misery. It is claimed by many theists that 1st order evils such as pain and suffering are necessary for 2nd order goods like courage and charity. However there exists what Mackie calls a “fatal objection” to this claim and that is that along with 2nd order goods there must also exist 2nd order evil...

    Read More

  • Resisting Conversations Is Not Analogous to Notional Confrontation.

    1525 Words  | 4 Pages

    (1) Schafer, Karl. "Assessor Relativism and the Problem of Moral Disagreement." The Southern Journal of Philosophy 50.4 (2012): 602-20. Web.

    Read More

  • Sally's Prescriptive Moral Theory

    1421 Words  | 3 Pages

    Sally’s prescriptive moral theory “picks and chooses” from other existing theories and combines them to make a hybrid theory. Doing so creates difficulties as the overlap reduces clarity and limits the strength of any individual argument. This is a challenge that cannot be overlooked; Sally’s theory fails to show structural reliability and is hence too problematic to have sound moral value.

    Read More

  • The Case Against Moral Relativism

    278 Words  | 1 Pages

    Pojman writes that morality is nonexistent because of mankind's subjectivism. Subjectivism is the idea that people determine their own set of morals, and they can not be in the wrong as long as they live by their own standards. Pojman uses the example of Adolph Hitler, and the fact that Hitler could be considered moral in the eyes of subjectivism. If this is true, who are we to say that Hitler was in the wrong.

    Read More

  • John Ludwig Mackie And Moral Objectivity

    1018 Words  | 3 Pages

    The purpose of this essay is to elaborate on John Ludwig Mackie’s argument that all moral judgments are false considering they presuppose moral objectivity which is itself inaccurate. To do so, I shall explain Mackie’s reasoning as to why the belief that moral values are objective was founded, and clarify Mackie’s arguments for why such an idea is misleading. Furthermore, I shall demonstrate how John McDowell’s color analogy can successfully prove Mackie wrong. The argument of this essay will establish that Mackie is immune to the idea of moral objectivity for he finds it queer and unsupportive of the relativity shown throughout the world. However, Mackie fails to acknowledge that properties that are dependent on

    Read More

  • Moral Issues in Shusaku Endo's Wonderful Fool and Albert Camus's The Outsider

    1566 Words  | 4 Pages

    It is debatable whether morality is a code of conduct that is considered right by society or whether it is a code unilaterally decided upon by an individual. When we consider morality as a tool used by both Shusaku Endo in Wonderful Fool and Albert Camus in The Outsider, this debate holds immense relevance. Wonderful Fool, heavily influenced by Christian doctrine, addresses the degeneration of Japanese society and the way moral issues are presented in the novel reflects this. In Wonderful Fool Shusaku Endo looks upon morality as the value system defined by the Bible, where Jesus Christ is regarded as the epitome of true goodness. In his portrayal of the main character he draws upon examples from Christ’s life to recreate a character whose morality is nearly flawless. The Outsider as a philosophical social commentary uses moral issues to demonstrate the absurdity of existence. Camus chooses to present morality as the code of conduct that an individual chooses to uphold regardless of the views of society or religion. He creates a character that lives according to his own “morality”. Although supposed by most readers to be amoral, this character, Meursault appears to be true to his personal convictions of objectivism. Meursault’s commitment to objectivity makes him moral in my opinion. Coined post-Camus, moral objectivism in this context refers to objectivity being used to guide one’s actions as opposed to subjective emotions or traditions. Both writers utilize characterization to present moral issues concerning honesty, consistency and non-conformity in a manner that supports their respective viewpoints.

    Read More

  • Moral Realism's Indispensability Argument

    1969 Words  | 4 Pages

    There are many arguments for moral realism, one of which is presented by David Enoch, who posits a unique explanation of how normative truths can exist. He argues for moral realism by using his Indispensability Argument, which explains the necessity of normative facts in deliberation. I will argue that Enoch’s claim is valid in that it fairs well against opposition, however it shows weakness by not addressing moral subjectivity.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of J. Mackie's The Subjectivity Of Values

    1123 Words  | 3 Pages

    J. Mackie in his essay, “The Subjectivity of Values”, geared his audience towards the idea that not all people’s moral values are necessarily the same. Not every person has the same value for certain circumstances, objects or other things which moral values can be applied to. Mackie explains moral values somewhat like this; that they are not necessarily based on behavior alone but that behavior can have some affect within certain values. Not all people that act similar necessarily will have the same values. I see Mackie trying to explain his view as many similar people have similar interests, but at the same time there is always those people who are similar by action but different by mentality and ethics. That is where Mackie drew the difference between the idea people were getting that he was solely basing his ideas off

    Read More

  • Difference Between Relativism And Moral Objectivism

    1394 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the attempt to explain morality, two prominent theories exist- moral relativism and moral objectivism. Morality in a sense is difficult to explain, both theories attempt to shed a bit of light in way to break down its complexity. Moral Relativism argues in the view that morality exists only due to the fact that it is relative, or in respect to, cultural or individual beliefs. In a sense, it is up to the people to determine what is right and wrong. On the other hand, moral objectivism views that morality is not parallel, or relative, to one 's beliefs. That it is independent and not subjective to one 's interpretations, thus it is objective and universal moral facts exist. Louis. P. Pojman, an American philosopher and professor,

    Read More

  • A Defense of David Hume's Moral Sense Theory

    2350 Words  | 5 Pages

    Morals are not objective because morals are response-dependent—derived from our emotions, or passions, rather than reason. In his argument on the basis of morals in A Treatise of Human Nature, Hume states, “Philosophy is commonly divided into speculative and practical; and as morality is always comprehended under the latter division, ‘tis supposed to influence our passions and actions.” He later argues, “Since morals, therefore, have an influence on the actions and affections, it follows, that they cannot be deriv’d from reason[…]Morals excite passions, and produce or prevent actions” (Hume 1978). At the root of every one of our actions, we find that we will always trace it back to a feeling that caused it. For example, I chose not to lie to my parents about my spending a lot of money because I knew that it would be wrong. It would not only be wrong because my parents have raised me to believe that lying is wrong, but also because I would feel guilty for disrespecting them. Thus, we judge as wrong or bad a...

    Read More

  • Is Morality Subjective or Objective?

    3598 Words  | 8 Pages

    Morality must be objectively derived because (1) the concepts of good and morality exist; (2) cultures differ regarding certain moral actions, thus there is the need to discover which is right but cultures are similar regarding the existence of and need for morality; (3) relativism is not logical and does not work, (4) for moral principles to be legitimate and consistent, they must be derived external to human societies. Otherwise morality is merely one person's choice or feeling, not an understanding of truth; and (5) the existence of religion. People recognize a moral aspect to the worship of deity; even if the deity does not exist, we still perceive a need for morality to be decreed by Someone or something greater than humanity.

    Read More

More about Mackie's Theory Of Ethical Objectivism

Open Document