Tag Archive for 'objective-truth'

It’s all Subjective

I am often interested in the objections to Ethical Subjectivism and Richard is stirring some up in what I imagine is his Reductio Ad Absurdum.

I would probably describe myself as a subjectivist, however I think the conclusions drawn (from all parties) from the doctrine of subjectivism in the realm of ethics tend to be absurd.

It is not contrary to subjectivism to consent to objective moral standards. For example, that taking an innocent human life is wrong, and should be avoided. The difference is, the subjectivist admits that there is no objective truth to this value, it only has power through agreement, not because it is rational, adheres to a moral formula, or was carved into stone a very long time ago.

The problem most opponents have with this is that you can have sub-cultures within society that create and agree to their own moral standards and seek to impose them on others (KKK, Nazi Germany, Christian Right, Muslim Fundamentalists) and whilst proponents of alternative ethical theories can be comfortable in proclaiming “This is clearly wrong” subjectivists have no basis to do so.

But to me this is just a creature comfort to think that whatever our preferences are must be right for the reasons we think are reasonable and therefore those that oppose them must be wrong. The subjectivist admits that neither is ultimately right or wrong but it does not follow that he must stand by whilst Germany invades Poland or whilst extremists behead women for adultery. He has a charter of morals to which he (and others) subscribe which may include intervening to prevent innocent lives to be taken and so he does. (Much like in my discussion of torture.)

Admitting that saving innocent lives is a subjective value, held by most people does nothing to detract from its function as a value, which is to be upheld and practiced. How do you go about deciding what values and morals should be included in the charter? Maybe you start with one’s written on rock, or use a logical formula?

Who cares?

Here you are in no less murky waters than any other theory.

, , , ,




Close
E-mail It