Difference between revisions of "Objective-subjective distinction"
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Work In Progress. | Work In Progress. | ||
| − | + | Objective morality is often the subject of straw-manning that results from a misunderstanding of what objective morality means, and an ambiguous objective-subjective distinction. If we consider the moral framework posed by Sam Harris, whereby, moral claims are made true or false depending on how they affect the well-being of conscious creatures. Whether this framework is subjective or objective depends on how one defines the objective-subjective distinction. If we take it to be; | |
| − | + | ''Moral facts are objective if they are made true or false by mind-independent facts, otherwise they are subjective'' | |
| + | Then this framework is subjective, as facts about the well-being of conscious creatures depends on the minds of conscious creatures. However if we take it to be | ||
| + | |||
| + | ''Moral facts are objective if they are made true or false by facts independent of the opinions of humans, otherwise they are subjective.'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | then the framework is objective, as facts about the well-being of conscious creatures do not depend on the opinion of humans. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The objective-subjective distinction tends to cause confusion and works against rational morality and moral discourse. In this article we will consider the positions of '''moral universalism (moral objectivism)''' and '''moral relativism''', which form a meaningful philosophical debate. | ||
=Moral Universalism vs Moral Relativism= | =Moral Universalism vs Moral Relativism= | ||
| + | |||
| + | =Consensus= | ||
=Moral Realism= | =Moral Realism= | ||
Revision as of 09:37, 9 January 2018
Work In Progress.
Objective morality is often the subject of straw-manning that results from a misunderstanding of what objective morality means, and an ambiguous objective-subjective distinction. If we consider the moral framework posed by Sam Harris, whereby, moral claims are made true or false depending on how they affect the well-being of conscious creatures. Whether this framework is subjective or objective depends on how one defines the objective-subjective distinction. If we take it to be;
Moral facts are objective if they are made true or false by mind-independent facts, otherwise they are subjective
Then this framework is subjective, as facts about the well-being of conscious creatures depends on the minds of conscious creatures. However if we take it to be
Moral facts are objective if they are made true or false by facts independent of the opinions of humans, otherwise they are subjective.
then the framework is objective, as facts about the well-being of conscious creatures do not depend on the opinion of humans.
The objective-subjective distinction tends to cause confusion and works against rational morality and moral discourse. In this article we will consider the positions of moral universalism (moral objectivism) and moral relativism, which form a meaningful philosophical debate.
