Subjectivism, Relativism, & Emotivism
Moral Objectivism...the doctrine that some moral norms or principles are valid for everyone-universal, in other words-regardless of how cultures may differ in their moral outlooks.
-Moral Absolutism...the objective principles with rigid rules that have no exceptions-must be applied in the exact same way in every situation and culture.
-Yes; Objectivism does require absolutism
-Subjective Relativism... The view that an action is morally right if one approves of it.
-Cultural Relativism... The view that an action is morally right if one's culture approves of it.
-Emotivism... The view that moral utterances are neither true nor false but are expressions of emotions or attitudes.
-Emotivism is influencing someone's behavior while objectivism is stating a fact.
Subjective Relativism implies moral infallability by individuals have genuine moral disagreement between individuals is nearly impossible. Our approval makes the action right.
According to moral subjectivism, moral disagreements are NOT possible because you can have two different subjects, but both statement could be true both claims not being opposed to one another. right=approves wrong=disapproves
-The argument for cultural relativism is the social reformers can never be morally right, that the moral disagreements between individuals in the same culture amount to arguments over whether someone disagrees with her culture, that the other cultures cannot be legitimately criticized, and that moral progress is impossible.
-The argument is NOT sound because the 1st premises is true and the 2nd is false.
The diversity of moral outlooks in cultures does not show that the right and wrong are determined by culture because it is determined whether society endorses a particular view.