Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (630,000)
UTSC (30,000)
Philosophy (1,000)
PHLA11H3 (100)
Lecture

PHLA11H3 Lecture Notes - Moral Skepticism


Department
Philosophy
Course Code
PHLA11H3
Professor
Kelin Emmett

Page:
of 2
Ethics Session 11
moral disagreement
between moral objectivism and skepticism
moral skepticism
no objective moral truths
1. nihilism
no moral truths
2. ethical-subjectivism
whatever is right and wrong depends on your personal opinion
Prinze
3. ethical-relativism
cultural version of ethical-subjectivism
moral disagreement
with each conflicting views
much variation across culture and time
ex. Cannibalism
argument from disagreement
claim
no objective ethical truths
doesn’t work because P1 is false
ex. scientists disagree
doesn’t mean that there are no objective truths
doesn’t work because P2 is false
ethical claims are not the only subject of disagreement
P1 is obviously false
P2 is too strong
version two of disagreement
Prinz
does not entail
is good evidence
Shafer-Landau replies to version two
1. lots of factors why there are so many disagreements
failures and limits
note: explains variations
ex. lack of adequate information
ex. factual
high stakes lead up to bias and less
2. disagreement shouldn’t lead us to moral skepticism
not thinking in the shoes of the sufferer
cannot settle philosophical empirical
disagreements will obviously arise
claim requires factual information
3. Prinz
impossible
argument two
internally contradictory
moral disagreement
impossible