Category: Objectivismsubjectivism

The Philosophy That Could Save Humanity

12/29/2018

Most of what we know about ethics is wrong, and unless we get our act together soon, humanity is doomed. That is, according to The Zombies (On Morality), a just released book by Josh Bachynski, which I've had the pleasure of reading, reviewing, and discussing on my YouTube Channel (see the video at the end of the post). Our lack of appropriate ethics is the basis of all of our problems. Essentially we are infected with a virus which sabotages every society that we try.

The problem, in Josh's estimation, lies with people imposing what he calls "objective-prescriptive," moral beliefs on others, when doing so may be sub-optimal for them. If the essence of morality is goodness, then any sub-optimality may be immoral for the person imposed upon. His argument is about maximizing what is ideal for each person. Nothing matters but the maximal epitome of what's positive and ideal.

To be more precise, he calls his system inter subjective-predictive morality or ISPM for short. ISPM is about giving each person what is morally ideal for them based on what they want, based on fact, rather than offering generalizations about what is right for everyone or what everyone should do, even if it isn't evident. Provided they aren't hurting someone else, there is no self-evident justification from barring someone from their best end good or from living their most valuable life.

4 Comments

Reconciling the Subjectivism/Objectivism Distinction in Meta-Ethics

2/5/2014

6 Comments

Can there be objective moral truths? Questioning whether moral judgments can be objectively true or false is part of the field of study know as meta-ethics in philosophy. Meta-ethics differs from normative ethics, which focuses on the criteria for right and wrong actions. Meta-ethical study addresses the meaning of moral language and the ultimate nature of moral facts.

One important meta-ethical distinction concerns the split between ethical subjectivism and ethical objectivism. Moral subjectivists claim that there are no moral truths, and that moral propositions cannot be true or false. Ethical objectivists think that there are objective moral truths.

It is my contention that the meta-ethical subjectivism/objectivism dichotomy can be reconciled. While the two may seem incompatible on the surface, there is no fundamental incompatibility between these distinctions, only differences based on perspective. Subjectivism and objectivism are actually complementary to one another.

I concede that ethical objectivism and ethical subjectivism are prima facie incompatible. Some level of meta-ethical subjectivism is inevitable because of limited facts, knowledge and perspective at the individual level. Moral truth is somewhat subjective for each person because of imperfect, atomistic knowledge. But subjectivism at the individual level does not preclude the existence of moral truth external to us at the objective, eternal level. Just because we are not aware, or not fully aware of objective moral truth, does not mean that objective truth does not exist externally.

Truth cannot be fully known without all relevant facts. Absolute, objective truth is based on omniscience; being in possession of all the facts, and combining perfect rational, intuitive and eternal knowledge. Relative truth is subjective, based on imperfect knowledge, and on the facts available to us, not all extant facts.

6 Comments