The moral diversity argument for nonobjectivism Free Essay Example, 1500 words

Moral diversity can be interpreted in different ways through a non-objectivist point of view. Non-objectivism is divided into three basic types: moral subjectivism, cultural relativism and moral nihilism. Moral subjectivism explains that morality is relative to the individual’s beliefs and values. The truth and the moral proposition are dependent on the individual’s personal standards. For example, if he thinks cheating is wrong because it is his belief that cheating is wrong, then it becomes a subjective way of looking into one’s moral standards. Simply put, subjectivism means morality varies from person to person. In cultural relativism, the moral standards are not dependent of personal standards, it is dependent on the cultural norms and standards. It is based on what the society and culture thinks as right or wrong. For example, cannibalism may be wrong for one culture but it may be acceptable for another. Moral principles then can be considered as based on one’s way of living according to the culture and society’s set of standards. Moral nihilism, on the other hand, describes moral claims as nonsense or existing with a category mistake. We will write a custom essay sample on The moral diversity argument for nonobjectivism or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/pageorder now This means that there is no real truth to moral claims since there is a mistake in placing a property, which is either being right or wrong, on them because it does not apply to them. Objectivists answer to this by explaining that the judgment on the goodness and the wrongness of beliefs and standards based on the idealization of life and the immediate responses of the people believing in them. For example, a society may believe in a monogamous relationship because the majority practice monogamy. All societies are seen to believe in a common belief, that is utilitarianism and universality, wherein people believe in a particular moral principle because they profit from it and because the majority believe in it (Gowans, 2002). b. What is A. J. Ayer’s key argument against ethical objectivism? Ayer’s key argument against ethical objectivism revolves around verification procedure. Herewith, Ayer explains that if moral claims were true or false, it should have an agreed procedure on which to verify its veracity (Ayer and Griffiths). The moral facts that objectivists state as right or wrong are not fact-stating because they have no real claim or standard procedure in which to verify the rightness of the wrongness of their claim. His claim, known as emotivism, actually stems from logical positivism, in which things that cannot be verified through logical analysis or sense experience is meaningless.