This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: 1. Error theory states that nothing is really and t ruly obligatory or forbidden, because nothing in objective reality actually has the special feature of ‘moral rightness’ or ‘moral wrongness’ about it. This is distinct from moral relativism because moral relativism states that some things really and truly are obligatory or impermissible: they are not just judged to be so by us; they are really so in themselves. But exactly which sorts of things are so is relative. The argument from disagreement states that disagreeing overwhat is morally right and wrong is often difficult to settle and this is either because there are no objective facts over and above whatever subjective or cultural commitments people happen to have or disagreements of this sort arise from perceptions of objective values. So overall it basically states that there are no objective facts concerning moral right and wrong. The weirdness argument states that if things really objectively have moral properties, then they have features and also it is doubtful that such peculiar properties actually exist out there so it is unclear how such properties of things could be detected by us because evidently this wouldn’t be a matter of sensory perception or mental introspection. So the most sensible conclusion is that nothing objectively possesses any distinctly moral features. 2....
View Full Document
- Fall '07
- Causality, Moral relativism states, weirdness argument states