The Theories Of Subjectivism And The Theory Of Objective Moral Truths

740 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Satisfactory moral theory

Moral Truths
Objective Moral Truths are truths that are thought to be true regardless of how an individual feels or thinks about those truths. An example of an Objective Moral truth is that a diet lacking of nutritional foods like sodas and Twinkies will not allow for a long, healthy life. This example is accepted by all persons regardless of their feelings or thoughts about fat enriched foods. The theory of Objective Moral Truths is often debated alongside the theory of Subjectivism and the Divine Command Theory. The theory of Subjectivism claims that truths are based on the person’s attitudes and feelings. This can be seen in any situation in which there is a preference. An example would be my preference for the comedic television show Psych is better than the serious, drama show The Mentalist. This example is …show more content…

If one was to prefer a more serious television drama, than my “truth” will be wrong to them and they would prefer The Mentalist over Psych. Another way our truths are conceived is through the Divine Command Theory. The Divine Command Theory states that our truths are determined through the commands, preferences, and will of God. The Ten Commandments are an example of God’s command. In the Ten Commandments, God clearly states ten rules in which his followers must abide by. They range from supporting other religions to being faithful and even to stealing and killing. The Divine Command Theory and Subjectivism both have arguments for and against them but none held as strongly as the arguments surrounding the theory of Objectivism.
Objectivism is often times argued against for three reasons. Two reasons are that morality is a product of culture and cultures disagree widely about morality. The argument that morality is a product of culture is often looked at more in depth. It is

Show More
Related

  • The Things They Carried by Tim OBrien

    2258 Words  | 5 Pages

    Throughout this honors ignition seminar, I have come to distinguish between two very useful, and powerful words: subjective truth and objective fact. Subjective truth, as I understand, is truth. The only difference separating it from universal or general truth is “subjective.” Our understanding of truth can cause arguments when trying to distinguish what is universally true. My definition of subjective truth, not necessarily perceived as true to others, is that the truth of something that happened may not be what actually happened to you, but what you felt happened to you. Objective fact, however, are based on facts that cannot be denied. They are legitimate, universal facts that everyone takes as true, but each may have a different interpretation of it. The main differences between subjective truth and objective fact is that subjective truth expresses one's own experience when understand the objective fact. Subjective truth has no correct definition, but I define it as: Subjective truth deals with subjectivity. Something th...

    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

  • The Case Against Moral Relativism

    278 Words  | 1 Pages

    "Who's to judge who's right or wrong?" In the case against moral relativism Pojman provides an analysis of Relativism. His analysis includes an interpretation of Relativism that states the following ideas: Actions vary from society to society, individuals behavior depends on the society they belong to, and there are no standards of living that apply to all human kind. An example that demonstrates these ideas is people around the world eat beef (cows) and in India, cows are not to be eaten. From Pojman second analysis an example can be how the Japanese take of their shoes all the time before entering the house. In Mexico it is rare that people take off their shoes. They might find it wired or not normal. In his third analysis he gives that sense moral relativism and cultural relativism are tied together, that their can be no

    Read More

  • The Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals

    1055 Words  | 3 Pages

    Can suicide be justified as morally correct? This is one of the many questions Immanuel Kant answers in, “The Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals”. Kant discusses many questions with arguable answers, which explains why he is one of the most controversial philosophers still today. Throughout Kant’s work, multiple ideas are considered, but the Categorical Imperative is one of the most prevalent. Though this concept is extremely dense, the Categorical Imperative is the law of freedom that grounds pure ethics of the metaphysics of ethics. Categorical imperatives are the basis of morality because they provoke pure reasons for every human beings actions. By the end of his work, one will understand Kant’s beliefs on morality, but to explain this, he goes into depth on the difference between hypothetical imperatives and Categorical Imperative, two different formulations of the Categorical Imperative, and a few examples.

    Read More

  • An Analysis Of William James's 'The Will To Believe'

    1103 Words  | 3 Pages

    Human beings’ belief systems don’t always work according to evidence. Belief is made up of

    Read More

  • The Ethics Of Relativism

    771 Words  | 2 Pages

    One type of universal principle is belief. A belief is how an individual feels when they speak to another individual or guidance that leads them to perform an action that could do good or cause harm. Beliefs can be a perception or guidance. Various cultures will carry own their own beliefs according to what they perceive to be accepted. Although beliefs vary and will be different amongst cultures, they are still feelings and ethical principles that are universal.

    Read More

  • A Satisfactory Moral Theory

    919 Words  | 2 Pages

    James Rachels expresses his thoughts on what a satisfactory moral theory would be like. Rachels says a “satisfactory theory would be realistic about where human beings fit in the grand scheme of things” (Rachels, 173). Even though there is an existing theory on how humans came into this world there is not enough evidence to prove the theory to be correct. In addition to his belief of knowing how our existence came into play, he also has a view on the way we treat people and the consequences of our actions. My idea of a satisfactory moral theory would be treating people the way we wish to be treated, thinking of what results from our doings, as well as living according to the best plan.

    Read More

  • Thesis Statement On Moral Relativism

    1003 Words  | 3 Pages

    Moral relativism is the concept that people’s moral judgement can only goes as far a one person’s standpoint in a matter. Also, one person’s view on a particular subject carries no extra weight than another person. What I hope to prove in my thesis statement are inner judgements, moral disagreements, and science are what defend and define moral relativism.

    Read More

  • Metaphysics of Morals

    1153 Words  | 3 Pages

    Through his discussion of morals in the Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant explores the question of whether a human being is capable of acting solely out of pure duty and if our actions hold true moral value. In passage 407, page 19, Kant proposes that if one were to look at past experiences, one cannot be certain that his or her rationalization for performing an action that conforms with duty could rest solely on moral grounds. In order to fully explain the core principle of moral theory, Kant distinguishes between key notions such as a priori and a posteriori, and hypothetical imperative vs. categorical imperative, in order to argue whether the actions of rational beings are actually moral or if they are only moral because of one’s hidden inclinations.

    Read More

  • Difference Between Relativism And Moral Objectivism

    1394 Words  | 3 Pages

    Moral objectivity is the rejection of enthnocentricism, or belief that one’s culture is superior than others. In short, one’s cultural beliefs cannot fundamentally be legitimate morals in the sense that they do not have to follow the “objective” morals. For example, Pojman supports a view stating that morals are universal, that they are "objective" in regard to it being that it doesn 't matter about what a culture defines as moral or immoral, that certain morals are undebatable. Such as for example, torturing children for fun is wrong. This is objectively true no matter what the world says otherwise; another example being that some still think the Earth is flat. In other words, moral objectivism states that "moral standards are true or correct for everybody"2. Thus moral objectivists tend to look at morals as absolutes. Pojman argued that humans are social creatures and that as humans, we did not want to live as "hermits"(first edition, 33), thus certain agreements must be made in order to attain community. Explaining further that agreements are "human nature" and that agreements are at the "core" of morality, as well as stating that to "flourish as a person" we agree to these moral codes in order to maintain harmony and peace. Morals in an evolutionary perspective, allow humans to survive. Such as for example, murder or killing other humans deemed as immoral or wrong. Pojman gives the example of serial murder Ted Bundy, who in his mind believed that killing people was O.K because it made him happy. He believed that killing and raping others is completely fine because those were his morals and what he personally believed in. This disturbs the social harmony and a moral objectivist would beg the question of whether it is right to murder and rape others because one or culture views it as acceptable. Same question can be asked about Hitler, as Pojman did, does it make it acceptable and justifiable that because Hitler and the

    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

  • Moral Relativism

    1958 Words  | 4 Pages

    Moral relativism, as Harman describes, denies “that there are universal basic moral demands, and says different people are subject to different basic moral demands depending on the social customs, practices, conventions, and principles that they accept” (Harman, p. 85). Many suppose that moral feelings derive from sympathy and concern for others, but Harman rather believes that morality derives from agreement among people of varying powers and resources provides a more plausible explanation (Harman, p. 12).The survival of these values and morals is based on Darwin’s natural selection survival of the fittest theory. Many philosophers have argued for and against what moral relativism would do for the world. In this essay, we will discuss exactly what moral relativism entails, the consequences of taking it seriously, and finally the benefits if the theory were implemented.

    Read More

  • The Three Classical Ethical Theories

    1435 Words  | 3 Pages

    Every day we are confronted with questions of right and wrong. These questions can appear to be very simple (Is it always wrong to lie?), as well as very complicated (Is it ever right to go to war?). Ethics is the study of those questions and suggests various ways we might solve them. Here we will look at three traditional theories that have a long history and that provide a great deal of guidance in struggling with moral problems; we will also see that each theory has its own difficulties. Ethics can offer a great deal of insight into the issues of right and wrong; however, we will also discover that ethics generally won’t provide a simple solution on which everyone can agree (Mosser, 2013).

    Read More

  • The Devine Command Theory

    853 Words  | 2 Pages

    The argument from objectivity of morality also advocates the Divine Command Theory. It states that moral standards are objective, separate from all culture’s judgment. It also states that they’re universal. Thus, morality can only be objective and universal if it depends on the commands of God. In response, morality is solely dependent on God’s commands.

    Read More

  • The Challenge Of Cultural Relativism

    761 Words  | 2 Pages

    Cultural relativism is the idea that moral and ethical systems varying from culture to culture, are all equally credible and no one system is morally greater than any other. Cultural relativism is based on the concept that there is no “ultimate” standard of good and evil, so the judgement of what is seen as moral, or immoral, is simply a product of one’s society and/or culture. The general consensus of this view is that there is no ethical position that may be considered “right” or “wrong” in terms of society and culture (Cultural Relativism). In this paper I will argue that cultural relativism is not an adequate view of morality by providing evidence of its most common logical problems and faulty reasoning.

    Read More

More about The Theories Of Subjectivism And The Theory Of Objective Moral Truths

Open Document