In this paper, I take the position that ethical objectivism is true, using Harry J. Gensler’s theory for ethical objectivism, the Golden Rule (GR) Intuitionism. I will first present Gensler’s argument, explaining why his argument is sound and proves ethical objectivism. I will then introduce what I consider to be the strongest argument against Gensler’s theory, David Hume’s argument of how Moral Motivation Undermines Moral Objectivity. I will then attempt to show how the argument does not show that GR Intuitionism is false with the aid of Immanuel Kant’s view on reasoning in morality. By showing how the GR Intuitionism is sound, and refuting Hume’s argument, I will argue that ethical objectivism is true.
Ethical objectivism is the meta-ethical view that there is at least one objective moral standard, and that some moral claims are objectively true. An objective moral standard applies to …show more content…
If one is conscientious, one will not do something to another person unless one believes that this action would be all right (i.e., morally permissible).
2. If one is impartial, one will not believe that an action would be all right unless one believes that it would be all right for this same action (i.e., exactly or relevantly similar action) to be done to himself/herself in the same situation (i.e., exactly or relevantly reversed situation).
3. If one is conscientious, one will not believe that it would be all right for an action to be done to him/her in a given situation, unless he/she is willing that action be done to him/her in that situation.
4. So, if one is conscientious and impartial, then one will not do something to another person unless he/she is willing that the same action be done to him/her in the same situation.
5. One who is (suitably-situated) ought to be conscientious and impartial.
6. Therefore, no one (who is suitably-situated) ought to do something to another person unless he/she is willing that the same action be done to him/her in the same
Ethical objectivism is the meta-ethical view that there is at least one objective moral standard, and that some moral claims are objectively true. An objective moral standard applies to …show more content…
If one is conscientious, one will not do something to another person unless one believes that this action would be all right (i.e., morally permissible).
2. If one is impartial, one will not believe that an action would be all right unless one believes that it would be all right for this same action (i.e., exactly or relevantly similar action) to be done to himself/herself in the same situation (i.e., exactly or relevantly reversed situation).
3. If one is conscientious, one will not believe that it would be all right for an action to be done to him/her in a given situation, unless he/she is willing that action be done to him/her in that situation.
4. So, if one is conscientious and impartial, then one will not do something to another person unless he/she is willing that the same action be done to him/her in the same situation.
5. One who is (suitably-situated) ought to be conscientious and impartial.
6. Therefore, no one (who is suitably-situated) ought to do something to another person unless he/she is willing that the same action be done to him/her in the same