Chapter 2

Subjectivism, Relativism, and

Emotivism

Copyright © 2019 W. W. Norton & Company

Four Perspectives on Moral Judgments
• Objectivism
• Cultural relativism
• Subjective relativism
• Emotivism
Objectivism – 1
Objectivism: The theory that moral truths exist and that they do
so independently of what individuals or societies think of them.
(This is not the same as absolutism, which does not acknowledge
that objective principles may allow for exceptions, depending on
circumstances.)
Objectivism – 2
Implications:
• Moral disagreements can be resolved using reasoning.
• Moral judgments and actions can be evaluated according to
universal standards.
Subjective Relativism – 1
Subjective relativism: the view that an action is right if one
approves of it
Subjective Relativism – 2
Implications:
• Everyone is morally infallible.
• Genuine moral disagreement between individuals is nearly
impossible.
• Moral judgments are a matter of preference (“taste”).
Cultural Relativism – 1
Cultural relativism: the view that an action is right if one’s
culture approves of it
(Moral rightness and wrongness are relative to cultures.)
Stace’s Argument for Cultural Relativism – 1
1. People’s judgments about right and wrong differ from
culture to culture.
2. If people’s judgments about right and wrong differ from
culture to culture, then right and wrong are relative to
culture, and there are no objective moral principles.
3. Therefore, right and wrong are relative to culture, and there
are no objective moral principles.
Stace’s Argument for Cultural Relativism – 2
Implications:
• Cultures are morally infallible.
• Cultural values cannot be criticized from outside the culture.
• Social reformers within a culture are, by definition, morally
wrong.
• Moral progress is virtually impossible.
Stace’s Argument for Cultural Relativism – 3
Critiquing Stace's argument for cultural relativism
• From the fact that people in different cultures have different
moral judgments, it does not follow that the cultures have
different moral standards.
• Consider: If you say the earth is round, and someone else says
the earth is flat, does this disagreement show there is no
objective truth about the shape of the earth?
Stace’s Argument for Cultural Relativism – 4
Critiquing Stace's argument for cultural relativism
• People may differ in their moral judgments, not just because
they accept different moral principles, but also because they
have divergent nonmoral beliefs.
• Disagreements may arise simply because some people are
wrong about the objective moral facts.
Cultural Relativism and Tolerance – 1
Tolerance is an admirable virtue for any society. But—
• Does cultural relativism entail tolerance?
• Does the idea that all cultures are morally equal support the
virtue of tolerance?
Cultural Relativism and Tolerance – 2
The inconsistency of cultural relativism:
If tolerance is an objective moral value, then cultural relativism
must be false.
Cultural Relativism and Tolerance – 3
There is no necessary connection between tolerance and
cultural relativism.
Cultural Relativism and Tolerance – 4
According to cultural relativism, intolerance can be justified just
as easily as tolerance.
Cultural Relativism and Tolerance – 5
Rejecting cultural relativism (embracing moral objectivism)
does not entail intolerance.
Emotivism – 1
Emotivism: the view that moral judgments cannot be true or
false but are instead expressions of emotion or attitude
Emotivism – 2
Implications:
• Moral disagreements are not disagreements of fact because
there are no moral facts, only differences in attitude.
• There are no moral facts, only attitudes about moral
judgments.
• There are no such properties as “goodness” or “badness,” and
thus nothing is actually good or bad.
Credits
This concludes the PowerPoint slide set for Chapter 2
Doing Ethics: Moral Reasoning and Contemporary Issues
Fifth Edition (2019) by Lewis Vaughn.

Copyright © 2019 W. W. Norton & Company