Exam 4: Subjectivism Julia Driver
Driver's ultimate view of subjectivism can best be described as
C
Are some acts right or wrong regardless of what anyone happens to believe? If so, what explains that fact?
Yes, some acts are considered right or wrong regardless of what anyone happens to believe. This is because certain actions can be objectively harmful or beneficial to individuals or society as a whole. For example, murder is generally considered wrong because it causes harm to the victim and their loved ones, regardless of anyone's personal beliefs. Similarly, acts of kindness and generosity are often considered right because they bring about positive outcomes for others.
The explanation for this fact lies in the principles of ethics and morality, which are based on the well-being and flourishing of individuals and communities. These principles are often rooted in concepts such as empathy, fairness, and the social contract, which transcend individual beliefs and opinions. Additionally, many societies have established legal systems and codes of conduct that reflect these shared moral values, further reinforcing the idea that certain acts are objectively right or wrong. Ultimately, the recognition of certain actions as universally right or wrong is grounded in the fundamental human experience of empathy and the desire for a just and harmonious society.
Driver explains that, in her view, a moral statement must be believed by someone or other in order for it to have a truth-value.
False
Subjectivism views morality as being about personal preference, not truth-values.
The form of subjectivism that Driver focuses on treats moral claims as
Driver admits that subjectivism is an attractive view because it appears tolerant of diverse viewpoints.
Driver argues that moral claims are radically different from descriptive claims.
If subjectivism is true, then when a person says, "Abortion is wrong," this means
On Driver's view, claims like "Abortion is always wrong" cannot be true for one person but false for another.
According to Driver, we discover the truth of descriptive claims by
According to Driver, if subjectivism is false, then which of the following must be true?
Driver defines subjectivism as a form of moral relativism which holds that individual beliefs or attitudes determine the truth-value of moral claims. Suppose Driver is right that subjectivism is untenable. Are there other, more plausible forms of moral relativism? How would they differ from subjectivism?
Driver thinks that it is natural to believe that, when moral argumentation occurs,
By Driver's lights, the view that "what is 'right' for me may not be 'right' for you" has the troubling implication that
Subjectivism, as presented by Driver, holds that the larger social community determines whether a given practice is morally right or wrong.
Driver rejects subjectivism for which of the following reasons?
Driver's arguments against subjectivism presuppose that moral disagreement over truth is an essential part of morality, for which any good theory of moral truth must account. Is she right about this? Why or why not?
According to Driver, subjectivism is a form of moral relativism.
Filters
- Essay(0)
- Multiple Choice(0)
- Short Answer(0)
- True False(0)
- Matching(0)