John Leslie Mackie Relativity Summary

1470 Words 6 Pages

John Leslie Mackie maintained that there is no objective moral truth. Throughout my essay I aim to establish what Mackie meant by this, I shall then go on to explore his ‘Argument from Relativity’ (more commonly known as the argument from disagreement) which he displays in his paper ‘The subjectivity of Values’ (1977). Finally, I shall investigate an important objection to the argument outlining how Mackie and other scholars respond to these critics. I believe that they respond sufficiently to the criticisms, critics appear to make fundamental misunderstandings regarding the way in which agents construct their beliefs leading them to falsely conclude that objective values exist. As a moral anti-realist Mackie supposes that moral properties cannot exist independently of the mind. Anti-realism is an umbrella term for a range of theories, but Mackie specifically advocates moral error theory and so when he says that ‘There are no objective values’ he is stating that moral values and judgments aim at truth but fail. Therefore, statements regarding morality for example ‘murder is wrong’ despite the general acceptance are not true …show more content…
One way he argued for this was through his argument from relativity in which he supposes the best way to explain the wide spread moral disagreement within society was to conclude that values are relative, and there are no objective truths regarding morality. I deem this to be a successful argument, critics whom provide alternative explanations for this phenomenon make a underlying misunderstanding regarding human nature, placing too much emphasis on facts and underling general principles, both of which appear to play a fairly insignificant role in the construction of moral

Particularism Vs Pluralism

For example lying to someone is seen as morally impermissible in most ethical principles such as deontology and Rule consequentialism. But if we add that I’m lying to a murderer because he wants to kill my brother, I am sure the perspective of people assessing the morality of the action changes. The problem with moral principles is that a single principle leaves out too many valid moral concerns, which leads to the inability to give concrete moral procedures. If we brought this problem on a larger scale, as we do with pluralism, it leads to complex and conflicting viewpoints. Going back to my previous example, If a pluralist were to tell me , "Don’t lie ", but in the same action say consider the principle that you shouldn’t harm your loved ones ", I know I would be confused and less inclined to follow this ethical principle.…

Words: 1444 - Pages: 6

Kant's Metaphysics Of Morality Analysis

To Kant, the proprietors of self love make a category mistake by basing their viewpoint on empirical psychology; happiness is contingent and therefore are not capable of being commandments of reason (Kant 329). Imposing empirical principles for morality is dangerous because the unconditional purity of the prescription is ruined; the will can no longer behave autonomously (Kant 340). This is because reason is a priori and necessary. For Kant, the idea of an a priori power of reason that determines the will precedes all contingent, empirical factors; this will must apply to all possible rational beings (324). The psychology of human beings is irrelevant in the question of the existence of a morality based off of…

Words: 775 - Pages: 4

Conclusion Of Cultural Relativism

Therefore, moral truth is relative and varies from culture to culture. Further on, he justifies why the cultural relativism argument is invalid, and why cultural relativism (if it were true) is an unacceptable form of morality. Finally, he makes concessions to acknowledge some valuable learning points of cultural relativism. In this essay, I argue the flaws in his conclusions and maintains that although it is important for objective truths to exist, cultural relativism may still be a best explanation for some extreme cases of disagreements that we observe today. The Cultural Differences argument postulates that different cultures have different moral codes.…

Words: 1886 - Pages: 8

Personal Narrative: My Personal Ethical Theories

It is said by Kant that actions are moral only if they are done with a good will, which means that a duty is done “simply because it is your duty” (Doing Ethics, 102). Immanuel Kant’s theory has many flaws and problems which make it an invalid method to determine morality. First of all, Kant’s theory suggests that laws and morals are decided by humans who use reason and their intellect, and that looking to a higher authority would be wrong. This is a major flaw in the theory because what makes one person’s reasoning better than another’s? Everyone reasons differently and has radically different views of what is and is not wrong, so everyone agreeing to make a law universal is nearly impossible.…

Words: 1529 - Pages: 7

Comparing Justice In Glaucon And Adeimantus

Glaucon and Adeimantus were both prominent advocates with their perspectives against justice being an intrinsic good. An intrinsic good - something good in itself, what we value for what it naturally is and nothing more, such as friendship or happiness or emotions as a whole are considered to be intrinsic goods. Glaucon raised experimental ideas against Socrates’ philosophy towards justice and challenged him with narrative examples and whatnot. He also brought forth that there are 3 types of good: intrinsic, instrumental and intrinsic/instrumental - the combination of both. Glaucon abided in justice being practiced with reluctance and that justice is done out of fear from consequence, therefore Glaucon raises the most objection in relation to whether or not justice is an intrinsic good or opposite.…

Words: 784 - Pages: 4

Analysis Of Nagel's Moral Luck

The relationship between moral luck and the condition of control creates a conflict that Nagel is trying to get across. When we consider the universal truths about responsibility, he outlines the accepted conditions which excuse moral judgement as having “clear absence of control” (Nagel, 25). This means that one cannot be morally assessed for what is not in one’s control. The condition of control is an ideology that can generally be agreed upon when it is an obvious lack of physical control, such as involuntary movement, but often fails to be seen when it is not so obvious. Nagel says that everything results from a “combined influence of factors,”(Nagel, 35) which further indicates nothing is truly within one’s control.…

Words: 785 - Pages: 4

Debunking Ethical Realism

William J. FitzPatrick’s “Debunking Evolutionary Debunking of Ethical Realism” functions to refute several related arguments against realism. I will not go into detail on any of those arguments. Instead I will try to summarize FitzPatrick’s understanding of our moral beliefs’ ability to track moral facts and his general response to debunking arguments. It will be useful to have a brief sketch of the type of argument against realism that FitzPatrick has in mind. He grapples with two general forms of debunking arguments, both of which state that the source of moral beliefs is separate from moral facts.…

Words: 712 - Pages: 3

Moral Beliefs: Relatief Or Practice Is Right Or Wrong?

He notes how any society will have certain standards ingrained within its members and that these ingrained morals cannot simply just be forced aside when confronted with a separate society with differing morals. (Williams, 21) Rachels’ relativism argument and Williams’ counter argument are examples of philosophies without a universal moral truth and an argument that debases it. The case of Rachels’ relativism is a little strange in that, while the theory claims to be spreading tolerance of other cultures, the lack of a universal standard to base the moral judgements upon brings up the question of how one would judge their own moral standards. This is especially potent in cases where a culture permits acts such as conquest and genocide-acts that obviously will bring harm to others. The Nazi regime is a prime example of this.…

Words: 1298 - Pages: 5

Compare And Contrast The Enlightenment And Transcendentalist Thought By Thomas Paine

He says, “It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, …. that mental lying has produced in society”(2). Here he indicates that society’s perspective has been corrupted by immorality; therefore, verifying his belief that society’s opinion is insufficient. Thoreau also supports this claim; however, he uses a different technique to disclose his conviction. He says, “I hesitate to burden my attention with those which are insignificant, which only a divine mind could illustrate”(4).…

Words: 1491 - Pages: 6

Truth Is Good Analysis

In this case morality trumps the pursuit of truth. Lynch files truth under prima facie good, because he still believes that truth is good in itself, but some virtues should take precedence over truth. After describing the difference between cognitive good and moral good, Lynch focuses of context and significance in good beliefs. After examining that some truths and beliefs are not good to pursue Lynch uses significance to filter out the truths not good to have. Significant truth is truth that we actively want to pursue, after accounting for our preferences (Lynch 52).…

Words: 1528 - Pages: 7

John Leslie Mackie Relativity Summary

Related Documents

Particularism Vs Pluralism

Kant's Metaphysics Of Morality Analysis

Conclusion Of Cultural Relativism

Personal Narrative: My Personal Ethical Theories

Comparing Justice In Glaucon And Adeimantus

Analysis Of Nagel's Moral Luck

Debunking Ethical Realism

Moral Beliefs: Relatief Or Practice Is Right Or Wrong?

Compare And Contrast The Enlightenment And Transcendentalist Thought By Thomas Paine

Truth Is Good Analysis

Related Topics

Ready To Get Started?

Discover

Company

Follow