Notes on “Simple Subjectivism”
Common, but what are the arguments against it?
If someone says
“X is morally right”
“X is morally permissible”
“X is good”
then that person has said “I (the speaker) approve of X,” or “I (the speaker) like X.”
If someone says
“X is morally wrong”
“X is morally impermissible”
“X is bad”
then that person has said
“I (the speaker) disapprove of X,” or
“I (the speaker) dislike X.”
Can we ever be in error in our moral views? Can we ever be mistaken, i.e., think something is wrong (or right) when it is not? If SS is true, then we easily cannot.
1. If SS is true, then if we accurately report on what we personally approve of then, necessarily, we tell the truth about what’s morally right or wrong.
2. But it’s not true that if we accurately report on what we personally approve of then, necessarily, we tell the truth about what’s morally right or wrong.
3. So SS is not true.
Do we ever disagree about what’s right and wrong? If SS is true, then often we do not.
Person A says “All abortions are wrong.”
Person B says “All abortions are not wrong.”
It appears they disagree. For any topic, if people disagree, then they both cannot be telling the truth: at least one of them must have a false belief.
1. If SS is true then: if person A accurately reports that she disapproves of all abortions, then she says something that’s true and if person B accurately reports that she approves of all abortions, then she says something that’s true.
2. If A says something that’s true and B says something that’s true, then they do not disagree.
3. So, if SS is true, then person A & B do not disagree. (hypothetical syl.)
4. But they do disagree.
5. So SS if not true. (3, 4, MT)
Emotivism
· To judge that something is right is to express (not state) one’s approval of something.
· To judge that something is wrong is to express (not state) one’s disapproval of that something.
If emotivism is true, then we cannot reason about ethics.
But we can reason about ethics.
Therefore emotivism is false.
