that all moral judgments are probably false: the argument from relativity and argument fromqueerness. Based on my first premises, if morality depends on the eye of the beholder, then everyone isseeing things equally well. However, I disagree with this, I don’t think everyone is precise abouttheir moral actions because people simply can change their mind in any time. Obviously, one canbe wrong about moral beliefs, not everyone has to agree with the same truth. If two people havea moral disagreement, and both are moral subjectivists, then they cannot both be right. Hence, anindividual cannot be precise, and the premise “not everyone is precise about moral beliefs” itsupports that moral subjectivism is not true. Overall, I think that without universal moral truths, all morality loses its ownsignificance. Every individual will act morally as long as they believe in their own actions. Inaddition, for someone an action might be right but for others might be wrong, which meanssociety cannot punish someone for doing something wrong, like murder. They can only expressapproval or disapproval based on their own personal subjective belief. In fact, the belief inobjective moral truths is fundamental to maintain a moral society. I think that there are universaland objective moral truths.
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read the whole page?
- Fall '08