Theories Of Ethical Objectivism

Mackie vs. Ethical Objectivism Ethical Objectivism claims that some moral standards are true and some are false and that does not depend in anyway on what people want or believe. This claim is argued by J.L. Mackie, his thesis is that there are no objective values or moral fact. 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 …show more content…
In the argument of relativity Mackie wants to state that there are no objective beliefs. An example of this is shown in both the notes and by Mackie (1977) “… people approve of monogamy because they participate in monogamous way of life rather than that they participate in a monogamous way of life because they approve of monogamy.”
1
(The Ethical Life, p.177) This shows that people do things because that is what is done in one’s society, and that there are no objective beliefs, because people do things not because they want to or believe in something but only because that is what everyone else does. In Mackie’s argument of queerness is an argument against objective values, Mackie (1977) stated that, “If there were objective values, then they would be entities or qualities or relations of a very strange sort, utterly different from anything else in the universe.” (The Ethical Life, p.177) If you analyze this statement you can conclude that no such strange entities exist in the universe which means that objective values are false. He states that moral fact are simply natural facts, and that physical facts form a foundation. In