P2 if we cannot care for everyone and the scope of

This preview shows page 18 - 21 out of 32 pages.

P2: If we cannot care for everyone and the scope of the moral community is determined bythose that we care-for, then it seems that (i) we have no moral obligations to those we don’tcare for or (ii) the notion ofcareis insufficient to explain all of our moral obligations.P3: We do have moral obligations to those that we do not care-for.C: Therefore, care ethics is either false or incomplete.A care ethicist might rejectP2and contend that we do not simply have ethical obligations to thosewe care for. The care ethicist might weaken P2 and contend that we have moral obligations toindividuals if (i) there is the potential to have a relationship with them and (ii) that relation has thepotential to grow into a relationship where we would care for them.Exercise 4.2How might a care ethics approach respond to the above argument? Which premisewould it reject?4.4Further ReadingsThis handout relied upon a number of works, including:Held, Virgina. 2006.The Ethics of Care: Personal, Political, and Global. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.Shafer-Landau, Russ. 2018.The Fundamentals of Ethics.4th ed. New York: Oxford UniversityPress.Engster, Daniel. 2007.The Heart of Justice.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5. Ethical Relativism5.1Introduction: moral nihilism and moral relativismThis handout introduces the topic of moral (ethical) relativism.Definition 5.1 — moral skepticism.Moral skepticism refers to the general position that objectivemoral standards, principles, or truths are problematic either because (i) they do not exist or (ii)there is no way of knowing them.First, moral skepticism comes in two forms. The first is the form that denies theexistenceof objectivemoral standards, principles, or truths. The second is the form that raises doubt about our capacitytoknowthese objective moral standards, principles, or truthsSecond, defining moral skepticism involves the notion ofobjective moral standards, principles, ortruths.Definition 5.2 — objective moral standard.An objective moral standard is a rule, principle, ormaxim that states what one should or should not do that applies to everyone at all times regardlessof whether they believe, know, or disagree with that standard.Third, there are two principal varieties of moral skepticism of the sort that assert that object moralstandards, principles, or truths do not exist. These are (i) moral nihilism and (ii) moral relativism(we won’t consider forms of moral skepticism that have to do with knowledge).Definition 5.3 — moral nihilism.Moral nihilism asserts that there are no objective moral truthsbecause there are no moral truths at all.Moral nihilism are moral skeptics about objective moral standards not because they assert thatmoral standards fail to be objective (apply to everyone independent of whether or not they agree
5.2 Cultural relativism20with them) but because no moral standards simply do not exist at all.Definition 5.4 — moral relativism.Moral relativism asserts that there are moral truths but none ofthese moral truths are objective; instead, all moral truths are relative.First

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture