PHI 112 Ethics M1 Introduction to Philosophical writing
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Pueblo Community College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
112
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by mirmrox2020
1
Miranda Archuleta
Professor Moriss
PHI 112
February 6, 2022
Introduction to Philosophical Writing
Moral Subjectivism: Naïve Moral Subjectivism
Moral Subjectivism is the determination of what is right or wrong based upon the authority of the individual persons beliefs. When deciding if morality is a matter of opinion or based on facts, it is a consideration of all sides to include the individual perspective, regardless of
the overall approval of society or the other individual. In order to understand and evaluate moral claims, Mark Timmons provides clarifying criteria that are to be addressed as strengths and weaknesses of the claim. When considering the perspective of Naive Moral Subjectivism if I approve of something, it must be good, right? If that thought resonates with you, you might be a naïve thinker when it comes to moral subjectivism. Is morality a matter of opinion? Is this a strong way of thinking or is it a weak one? I will argue that the naïve version of moral subjectivism is weak. The evidence shows that this is a weak theory overall. The reasons it is weak are because it lacks intuitive appeal, external support and consistency.
As previously stated, naïve moral subjectivism is weak. The first reason it is weak is because it’s flawed intuitive appeal. Intuitive appeal is what someone feels to be right, however, this lacks evidence and support. If naive moral subjectivism is right while two individuals have different opinions and both are right, then moral subjectivism fails to explain what is right and what is wrong. What is right is to be determined by each person, what if the person determining what is right is biased or prejudiced. If this is the case then it is not their beliefs that are right,
2
bias and prejudice is right. An example to represent this would be difficulty accepting people outside of social group. Although we know it is wrong to discriminate it may not be recognized and this likely to stem from implicit biases and prejudice (Fisk, 2022).
In addition, the second reason it is a weak strand of moral subjectivism is because it lacks
external support entirely. To me if something perfectly aligns with my view of thinking that is right by my moral compass. If a person challenges the beliefs for the topic in question, one is likely to experience cognitive dissonance by rejecting new information and consider it incorrect or invalid simply because of the difference in opinion. Without the external support one can be missing out on potential valuable information. Knowledge is something that is acquired throughout the course of our lives through interactions and activities shared. An example of this weakness in lacking external support could be a presidential candidate. First it is unlikely this candidate would win without external support, if by some chance they did how successful would they be if they could not accept the ideas and opinions of others. The final reason of weakness for naïve moral subjectivism is that it lacks consistency. It is based solely upon what is determined to be right by each person. People differ greatly in what they consider right and wrong with this they cannot always be completely consistent moral verdicts. If a person’s judgement is right or wrong depending on their thinking when asked at one point in time yet emotions and feelings later change their thoughts on the same subject their answer can potentially go against what they previously said or felt. An example of this aspect can be the woman’s choice to have a tubal ligation. In many states you must be a certain age or meet a certain criterion to undergo this procedure. Findings from a 2016 study show that 28 percent of U.S. women who have had this procedure regret later (Shreffler et al., 2016).
3
Now on the contrary what if consistency is not an issue, one might say that people do not need to be consistent with other people’s moral verdicts. Despite being inconsistent in people’s moral verdicts one may argue that overall if people generally feel the same way about a topic the majority must be right. With this if people overall can share an agreement in moral verdicts despite typically differing this can be a strength not a weakness. An example of this would be vigilantes punishing criminals. As we know criminals are to be held accountable by those in an appointed position of power to do so. The vigilante will think they are doing the right thing in punishing these individuals however is committing a crime themselves. People supporting the vigilante would be contradicting their beliefs of holding criminals accountable. Therefore, this is still inconsistent. Naive view of moral subjectivism theory of ethics is when people make judgement about a topic describing their own feelings about the topic. The morality is decided by the individual. It
may be appealing since it allows you to measure what is right or wrong. Moral values are based solely on opinion. We can be able to identify whether something is right or wrong depending on the impact of an action towards the community. If the action leads to happiness, then it is right, if
it inflicts pain then it is wrong. We are each comprised of our individual beliefs and values. Just because I approve of something and consider it to be good, is that right? The naïve view of moral
subjectivism has many weaknesses. Potentially flawed intuitive appeal and feelings of what is right based upon potential bias and prejudice. The lack of external support which prevents us from rational discussions of ethical issues. Finally, the lack of consistency in decisions made which is based on an individual differs from one person to another depending on their experience
or emotional state. Despite any appeal of this view facts and research show the weakness in the foundation of the naive view of moral subjectivism.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
References
Fiske, S. T. (2022). Prejudice, discrimination, and stereotyping. In R. Biswas-Diener & E. Diener
(Eds), Noba textbook series: Psychology. Champaign, IL: DEF publishers. Retrieved from http://noba.to/jfkx7nrd
Shreffler, K. M., Greil, A. L., McQuillan, J., & Gallus, K. L. (2016). Reasons for tubal sterilisation, regret and depressive symptoms. Journal of reproductive and infant psychology, 34(3), 304–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646838.2016.1169397
Timmons, Mark. (2012). Moral Theory : An Introduction: Vol. 2nd ed. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.