Analysis Of Mackie's The Subjectivity Of Moral Values

Good Essays
The objectivity of moral values has been questioned greatly through out time. So, do objective morals and values really exist? Or are we so enamored with the idea that there is a standard universal code to follow for guidance. In his piece “The Subjectivity of Values” J.L Mackie states that, “There are no objective values.”(Landau175) The moral subjectivists uphold the idea that moral claims are only true, if they are objectively true. But what makes these true? Consequently what establishes their validity is the fact that they rely on subjective states of a person; states of desire, preference, or dislike. As a moral subjectivist Mackie gives two arguments for his point of view: the argument of relativity and the argument of queerness.
The argument of relativity is quite straight forward “…it claims that
…show more content…
This cannot be the other way around for example a difference in moral concepts is the practice of monogamy. After it is well established that the behavior is appropriate it would become really hard to challenge the norm if that is approved. If we accept this then instead of moral values being objective we accept them as a consequence of a social framework. Mackie’s attack on objective moral values ends rapidly. In some cases cultures adopt a moral code that violates most of the ideas of morality. What happens then? Mackie’s argument relies solemnly on the intrinsic rightness of the action. How about slavery, women’s rights’ there was evolution and disagreement they always geared toward the universal rules. That is because people judge some things as right or wrong not because of their ideals but rather on intuition or common moral sense. (177) This demonstrates that cultures’ moral judgment is found at many times to be wrong allowing for moral progress and the acceptance that morality does have objectively true

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Moral relativists such as David Wong and Gilbert Harman have provided a more sophisticated version of moral relativism which mitigated some flaws of the inaugural and naïve form which Rachel argued against. Cultural relativism is also a relevant theory to explain the extreme cases of disagreements in our world. However, there is still invalidity and shortcomings of the cultural relativism argument that hinders moral progress, or deteriorate the view about morality into nihilistic grounds. Hence it is still essential to maintain some moral truths as objective instead of accepting the theory in…

    • 1886 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    He argues ethical objectivism with two arguments which are the argument of relativity and the argument of queerness. I will argue that ethical objectivism’s argument that there are some moral standards that are impartially correct and some moral assertions that are true is false because, Mackie’s argument of relativity shows that people do not approve of something because they believe it but simply because they live it, it is also false because Mackie’s argument…

    • 413 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    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.…

    • 1298 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Moral Judgement Definition

    • 2135 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Does the claim that moral judgements are intrinsically motivating provide a good justification for non-cognitivism? The cognitive/non-cognitive divide posits that mental states and processes fall into either a category of perception which is analytical, or a category of attitude which is affective or impulsive. A moral judgement must be linked to some mental process, and according to some theories, moral facts in fact originate from mental processes. Moral judgements seem to stem from a certain conviction, which is easily interpreted as a belief which a person holds about what is true and good. However, the fact that moral claims can invoke a given attitude or sentiment, and act so compellingly, makes it evident that “non-cognitive” processes must be at play.…

    • 2135 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The plausibility that some cultures have “badly distorted” views of what is universally right and wrong is not only offensive, but highly unlikely. It is offensive on the grounds that it would inherently assume that some cultures are more morally aware of objective rights and wrongs than others, maybe implying these cultures are less civilized than those who follow non-distorted versions of universal moral…

    • 1437 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Social relativism implies the belief that moral values and norms are based off of the dominant attitudes within a given society or culture. The same action completed in once culture may be morally right to them, however, the same action done in a different culture could be seen as morally wrong. Strong relativism suggests that absolute, universal, and objective truths about morality do not exist. While on the other hand, weak relativism suggests that certain basic values and norms appear to be universal (in many cultures) but they are different in the way that they understand each of the values and norms. An example of this relativism would to have two cultures agree that life is to be valued, but each culture could disagree on what exact value they put on…

    • 1153 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    If theory-laden perception is true, then one is justified to any wacky, heterodox, and wrong belief just in case one started with that wacky mistaken belief. Such a result is utterly undesirable, both with non-moral beliefs and moral beliefs. It’s not that I desire justification to be factive, that is for truth to be necessary for justification. I agree with the conventional wisdom in the literature that justification is non-factive, that justification is fallible. Rather, my point is that whatever process someone proposes as the process of justification should attempt or try to track truth.…

    • 1550 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    We may reason why exactly or the many different scenarios where an action or duty may appear moral at first glance, what W.D. Ross may call “prima facie duties”, but not necessarily after careful consideration. Nevertheless, according to Hume it is that emotional feeling that makes us determine what is right or wrong, morally. Finally, being skeptic there is no surprise David Hume, makes the claim there is no such thing as absolute morality, but all morality judgments are subjective. Immanuel Kant’s view on morality is centered primarily around his notion of duty.…

    • 1013 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Subjectivity Of Morality

    • 1833 Words
    • 8 Pages

    The morality of every decision and action is objective. If morals are objective then as a society we may look back at certain actions and assess their morality. Just because an action or decision was agreed upon in the past or by certain parties as morally acceptable, it does not make those actions morally acceptable when we reflect up those times. That is why people and societies progress and reform in order to stray away from immoral actions. This contradicts the assessment made by J.L.…

    • 1833 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    A person's sense of morality is defined in terms of more abstract principles and values. Moral reasoning is based on individual rights and justice. People now believe that some laws are unjust and should be changed or eliminated. This level is marked by a growing realization that individuals are separate entities from society and that individuals may disobey rules inconsistent with their own principles. Post-conventional moralists live by their own ethical principle that typically include such basic human rights as life, liberty, and justice and view rules as useful but changeable rather than absolute dictates that must be obeyed without question.…

    • 965 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays