Mackie Philosophy Paper

Submitted By marielward18
Words: 538
Pages: 3

Mackie states that all claims about objective values and morals are false. He claims that these values are categorical and would apply for every person. If any so-called objective value claim were true, then Mackie would say that there would have to be both prospective and physical properties. He then goes on to say that there is no such thing for something to have both prospective and physical properties. Therefore, none of these claims would be true. For example, many people have ideas about mermaids and how we think one should look, act, and be like. But no one has ever actually seen a real live mermaid, because they do not exist. Things like these would make a moral value claim seem so weird to us that they would be so out of the ordinary and we would know that it was special. Mackie’s argument states that:
1.) If there were objective values, then they would be so out of the ordinary and strange that they would be completely different than anything else in the universe.
2.) No such strange things exist in this natural world.
3.) Therefore, there are no objective values.

Mackie tries to justify himself by giving examples of such strange entities. He highlights this in his argument from queerness. If these values did happen to be real and we did happen to know and be aware of them, then the only way we could know of them would be through our own perception and our own intuition. Not from the ordinary style of learning which would be through others. These values that come from our intuition can be often what leads us into a better understanding of an idea or a higher sense of education. Mackie states that “intuition merely makes unpalatably plain what other forms of objectivism wrap up.” (Mackie, 162)
He is saying how intuition may not be a good source for finding ones own self-education and knowledge. This can be proven wrong when people are forced to make decisions for themselves all the time. For example, people face…