02 Moral Truth and Knowledge Free Online FlashCards

What does moral objectivism claim?

Moral objectivism holds that at least some moral judgments are true or false independently of what any person or group believes.

What does moral realism claim?

Moral realism holds that moral claims purport to describe facts and that at least some such claims are true.

What challenge does deep moral disagreement pose for objectivism?

Critics argue that persistent moral disagreement casts doubt on whether moral inquiry reliably discovers universal truths.

How might an objectivist respond to moral disagreement?

Disagreement alone does not show there is no fact of the matter; it may reflect conflicting factual beliefs, self-interest, prejudice, or difficulty applying shared principles.

What makes a moral judgment true under simple individual subjectivism?

Moral subjectivism makes moral truth depend on attitudes or responses; in a simple individual version, an act is wrong if the person disapproves of it.

On what does moral relativism make some moral judgments depend?

Moral relativism makes the truth or justification of some judgments depend on a framework, such as a culture's norms or a person's commitments.

Does moral relativism by itself entail tolerance?

No. Relativism makes truth or justification framework-dependent, but concluding that different practices should be tolerated requires an additional moral principle.

What does moral skepticism question or deny?

Moral skepticism questions or denies one or more of these: moral truths exist, moral beliefs can be justified, moral knowledge is possible, or people have moral reasons to act.

What does non-cognitivism say about moral statements?

Non-cognitivism holds that moral statements do not function primarily as factual claims; they may instead express attitudes or prescribe actions.

What does error theory claim about moral statements?

Error theory holds that moral claims purport to describe objective moral facts, but none are true because the required facts do not exist.

How can reason and principles contribute to moral knowledge?

Reasoning can test moral judgments for consistency and examine what follows from general principles.

How can experience and consequences inform moral judgment?

Evidence about people's needs, policy effects, and the circumstances of an action can correct factual assumptions behind a moral judgment, though it may not settle the question by itself.