To this familiar kind of objection, there are two equally familiar responses. Although minimalism undermines the standard way in which anti-realists mark out their distinctive territory, there is still room for them to defend some alternative grounds for drawing the contrast between the areas about which one is a realist and those about which one is an anti-realist.
Though this is not sufficient to establish MMR, the most common rationales for MMR would be undermined if DMR or some descriptive thesis Moral disagreements significant moral disagreement or diversity were incorrect. The most prominent normative position in this connection concerns tolerance.
Though many people seem to think it does, philosophers generally think they are mistaken. Wong thought we might, perhaps on the basis of considerations quite independent of Kant. However, overall I found Tersman's book very interesting and thought provoking. However, for this reason, though it presupposes the considerations supporting the relativist dimension of his position there is no single true moralityit argues from the non-relativist dimension there are universal constraints any morality should accept, in particular, that one function of morality is to promote social co-operation.
But from where, then, can we get the moral premises needed? Moral Disagreement Perhaps the longest standing argument is found in the extent and depth of moral disagreement. Hence, moral judgments of this kind are valid only for groups of persons who have made such agreements.
On What Matters, Vol. In the classical Greek world, both the historian Herodotus and the sophist Protagoras appeared to endorse some form of relativism the latter attracted the attention of Plato in the Theaetetus.
However, this purported advantage raises an important question for relativism: The epistemic standards epistemology meets might well not be met by moral theory.
A Defense of Robust Realism, Oxford: Grammar alone, it seems, renders talk of truth and fact appropriate and does so without incurring the sort of metaphysical commitments that are rightly associated with genuine realism see GibbardDreier Relativism and Tolerance Relativism is sometimes associated with a normative position, usually pertaining to how people ought to regard or behave towards those with whom they morally disagree.
Moreover, some studies have shown interesting correlations with these differences, correlations that may partly explain them. This point is not necessarily an objection, but a defender of MMR would have to confront these issues and develop a convincing position concerning them.
However, this leaves room for very different conceptions of courage. Philosophers like Russell Blackford even argue that intolerance is, to some degree, important.C (MP) Perhaps moral opinions don't reflect the truth, just in the way that in non moral disagreement we assume some of the opinions don't another version of best explanation argument slavery used to be ok, we think it's wrong, if there was an objective truth, it would be self evident whether it is right.
Perhaps the longest standing argument is found in the extent and depth of moral disagreement. The mere fact of disagreement does not raise a challenge for moral realism.
Disagreement is to be found in virtually any area, even where no one doubts that the claims at stake purport to report facts and everyone grants that some claims are true. Resolving ethical disagreements in scientific, technical, and engineering fields is harder or easier the terms used in moral argument, common moral guidelines, debate through example and counter example, and logical probing of the coherence of arguments.
Since moral realism requires that if two persons are in disagreement over some moral question at least one must be objectively mistaken, it seems difficult to uphold that there can be moral disagreements without fault. The remainder of this entry will discuss DMR, the contention that it is unlikely that fundamental moral disagreements can be rationally resolved, arguments for and challenges to MMR, mixed positions that combine moral relativism and moral objectivism, and the relationship between moral relativism and tolerance.
But first there needs to be. Jul 13, · Since many moral disagreements seem intractable even among experts, the hypothesis that we are equipped to know moral truths directly is very difficult to sustain.
Still another way of attempting to justify moral judgments goes back to Aristotle: What is .Download