Simple Subjectivism Essay

794 Words4 Pages
What is simple subjectivism? Explain and evaluate the two best objections to it. Simple subjectivism is a metaethical theory that poses that qualities such as good and bad are true relative to the individual; thus moral judgements are simply expressions of opinion. However, this does not mean that every sentence uttered is true, as someone may propose a claim that does not correctly report their internal, subjective state. Despite being a theory which seemingly encourages acceptance and moral rationality, subjectivism is deemed as flawed on two predominant levels. Firstly, it assumes an infallibility for the speaker that is not justified. And secondly, subjectivism seemingly renders moral disagreement and therefore advancement impossible. Whilst these two objections may seem solid on a logical level, they pose little threat to subjectivism as an undeniable fact of reality. The first argument, that subjectivism creates infallible moral agents, reads as follows. In subjectivism, to say something is bad is to say one has a bad feeling about it. As one can not be mistaken about their feelings, one can not be mistaken about moral judgements. For those who have encountered someone with very objectionable moral viewpoints however, perhaps violent homophobia or racism, it seems obtuse to suppose such people to be as equally moral as a loving and accepting person. The argument concludes with the claim that, despite the supposed infallibility, people are often mistaken in their moral judgements. This would seem like a coherent argument if one took infallible to mean unchanging and constant, as the subjectivist mind would likely move around in moral viewpoint throughout a life and loose its constancy. However, subjectivism suggests that simply the action of believing and thinking a moral claim renders it true, regardless of whether one abandons such an outlook moments
Open Document