Assessment Task 1

Name: CAGURANGAN VANESA D. Course & Year: BSLEA 1A

I. Situation Analysis: Search for a situation that you think involves ethical subjectivism and emotivism.
Evaluate the situation by pointing out how both ethical models are fitted.

One situation that involves ethical subjectivism and emotivism is the debate around abortion. Ethical
subjectivism suggests that moral values are subjective and are based on personal feelings, opinions, and
beliefs. Emotivism, on the other hand, suggests that ethical claims do not express beliefs, but rather
emotions.

In the case of abortion, ethical subjectivism would suggest that the decision to terminate a pregnancy is
based on individual beliefs and values. Some people may believe that abortion is always wrong, while
others may believe that it is a personal decision that should be made by the person carrying the fetus.
Emotivism, on the other hand, would suggest that the debate around abortion is largely emotional.
People may feel strongly about the issue, but their arguments are not necessarily based on factual
evidence or logic.

Both ethical subjectivism and emotivism are fitted to the debate around abortion. Those who believe
that abortion is wrong from a moral perspective are likely to hold a subjectivist perspective, based on
their personal beliefs and values. Similarly, those who feel strongly about the issue from an emotional
perspective are likely to hold an emotivist view, expressing their feelings rather than providing evidence-
based arguments. Ultimately, the ethical debate around abortion depends on individual values and
emotional reactions, highlighting the relevance of both ethical subjectivism and emotivism.

2. Essay: Are ethical subjectivism and emotivism plausible for standards of morality? Justify your answer.

Ethical subjectivism and emotivism are two distinct views on standards of morality, with both having
their share of supporters and detractors. Ethical subjectivism claims that moral judgments are subjective
since they depend on individual opinions and personal beliefs, while emotivism posits that ethical
statements are indeed expressions of personal emotions and feelings rather than objective facts. The
validity of both ethical subjectivism and emotivism as plausible views on standards of morality is a
controversial topic, as various arguments have been raised for and against them.

Firstly, the plausibility of ethical subjectivism as a standard for morality is debatable. Supporters of this
view argue that our ethical beliefs are ultimately rooted in our subjective experiences, and hence, there
can never be one right or wrong answer for any moral question. For instance, cultural relativists
maintain that what is considered morally right or acceptable in one society may not be the same in
others since such judgments are highly dependent on cultural values and norms. Therefore, in a diverse
world with different cultures, ethical subjectivism seems to be a plausible way of determining standards
of morality.

However, the subjectivity of ethical judgments also presents a significant challenge. One of the most
significant criticisms of ethical subjectivism is that it leads to moral relativism, where all moral
judgments are deemed equally valid. This implies that there can never be any moral progress since there
is no objective standard against which we can measure our moral beliefs. Additionally, ethical
subjectivism enables individuals to deceptively justify immoral actions by claiming that subjective beliefs
justify their actions. It could also lead to social chaos because individuals might follow moral beliefs that
are ultimately harmful or destructive to themselves or society overall.

On the other hand, emotivism posits that moral statements are not objective facts but merely
expressions of personal emotions and feelings. Supporters of this view argue that ethical judgments are
nothing more than personal preferences masked in moral language. Therefore, emotivism claims that
moral statements are subjective experiences of the individual and cannot be grounded in objective
reality. However, the issue with this position is that it does not take into account the reality that our
moral statements can significantly impact others' lives. Furthermore, it seems to reduce moral
judgments to mere opinions, which are not subject to any scrutiny or logical analysis.

In conclusion, while both ethical subjectivism and emotivism offer different perspectives on standards of
morality, they both have their shortcomings. Ethical subjectivism seems to lead to moral relativism,
while emotivism reduces moral judgments to mere expressions of emotions without significant regard
for the impact of such statements. Therefore, while they both present plausible arguments, they are
ultimately flawed when subjected to logical and critical analysis. Rather than adopting either of these
views as the standard for morality, a more nuanced view should be applied that takes into account
diverse perspectives while providing objective standards for individuals and societies to live by.