New Chapter: Ethics and Morality

Intro to Philosophy Phil 110 Lecture 21: 3-27 Daniel Kelly I. Mechanics A. Upcoming Readings 1. Today we ll discuss a. Rachels, Subjectivism in Ethics b. Rachel s,the Challenge of Cultural Relativism 2. Next week a. Mill, Utilitarianism b. Le Guin, The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas c. Coates, The Case for Reparations B. Down the road a bit: 1. Second Paper Due: In lecture, Tuesday 3/27 2. Final Exam has been scheduled: a. Wednesday 05/02 b. 3:30p - 5:30pm c. This Room: Wetherill 172 d. Same format as midterm e. Cumulative New Chapter: Ethics and Morality I. Preliminaries II. Disagreement and Objectivity III. God & Morality: The Divine Command Theory (DCT) IV. Three forms of Moral Relativism A. Simple subjectivism (SS) B. Cultural relativism (two forms) 1. Basic idea 2. Speaker Centered Cultural Relativism (SCCR) a. The meaning of a particular moral claim has to do with the prevailing moral code of whomever makes the claim on the occasion it is made b. Intuitively i. Saying something like abortion is morally wrong ii. Really means something like abortion is not permitted by the moral code that prevails in my culture c. Note that the my refers to whomever is making the claim i. Thus to the moral code of the speaker ii. Not the moral code of the agent iii. This is important when the speaker and the agent are from different cultures, each of which has a different moral code d. A bit more formally i. It is morally wrong for agent(s) A to do action p

ii. Really means Since the moral code that prevails in my culture forbids action p, it is impermissible for agent A to do action p e. Examples f. If speaker centered cultural relativism is the correct metaethical theory, then moral claims are not objective i. Moral claims are the types of sentences that can be true or false (they are truth apt) ii. But whether a particular claim is true or false depends on who makes the claim iii. Since they make a disguised appeal to the moral code of the speaker s culture A. Its possible that the same claim 1. Can be true when made by one person, 2. False when made by another B. Or that what appear to be contradictory statements can both be true when made by different speakers 1. Consider the claim The practice of suttee is morally permissible 2. When the speaker isn t Barak Obama 3. But a member a Hindu culture whose moral code allows or requires suttee g. Two Skeptical Objections to SCCR i. SCCR would make moral disagreement across cultures an illusion A. Apparent arguments between people from different cultures would not be about the same thing 1. The member of each culture would be talking about their own culture s moral code 2. Since they wouldn t be talking about the same thing, they couldn t be disagreeing B. Seems absurd! ii. If SCCR is correct, then moral criticism of one s own culture would be incoherent A. There would be nothing above and beyond acting morally than conforming to the prevailing moral code itself B. One could not even say that the prevailing moral code in one s own culture is incorrect or immoral C. This makes it impossible to make sense of moral revolutionaries like Jesus Christ, Buddha, Martin Luther King Jr.

1. Who criticize the prevailing moral codes of their own cultures 2. In order to improve them, make them more moral D. Consider the claim The general idea of separate but equal, and the requirement that Blacks to sit in the backs of buses, are both immoral 1. Imagine the claim being made a. By Martin Luther King Jr. b. In Montgomery Alabama c. In 1955 2. According to SCCR, this claim would be False a. The moral code that prevailed in MLK Jr s culture, namely mid 1950 s United States b. Allowed separate but equal and included the norm requiring Blacks to sit in the backs of busses E. SCCR can t even make sense of the possibility of moral criticism of one s own culture s moral code F. Seems Absurd! 3. Agent Centered Cultural Relativism (ACCR) a. The meaning of a particular moral claim has to do with the prevailing moral code of the agent(s) whose action is being assessed by the moral claim b. Intuitively i. Saying something like abortion is morally wrong ii. Really means something like abortion is not permitted by the moral code that prevails in the culture of the person getting the abortion c. A bit more formally i. It is morally wrong for agent(s) A to do action p ii. Really means Doing p is prohibited by the moral codes that prevails in A s culture d. Examples i. Using terrorist methods to achieve social justice A. George W. Bush claiming The Al Qaeda members who flew planes into the World Trade Center were acting immorally. B. In this claim 1. The agents A are the Al Qaeda members 2. The action p is the flying planes into the World Trade Center

3. The relevant moral code is one that prevails in the agent s (not the speaker s) a. Since the agents are Al Qaeda members b. The relevant moral code is the one that prevails in Al Qaeda C. Since the moral code of Al Qaeda glorifies suicide bombing in the name of the cause, according to the ACCR, Bush s claim would be False ii. Slavery A. Barak Obama claiming It was morally wrong for Robert E. Lee to own slaves. B. In this claim 1. The agent A would be Robert E. Lee (confederate general) 2. The action would be that owning, buying or selling other human beings 3. The relevant moral code is the one that prevailed in the American South at the time of the Civil War C. So according the ACCR, Obama s claim would be False 1. Robert E. Lee lived in the American South at the time of the Civil War 2. Slavery was permitted by the prevailing moral code of that culture D. Consider Barak Obama claiming Slavery is, was, and always will be immoral 1. If ACCR is correct, this is also False 2. Why? Because there have been some cultures that permit slavery 3. So it is not true that slavery is forbidden by the prevailing moral codes of all cultures, at all times e. If ACCR is the correct, then moral claims are objective i. This is an important difference from SCCR, the speaker centered version of cultural relativism ii. This is also slightly counterintuitive but remember our criteria for what makes a claim objective iii. If ACCR is correct, then A. Moral claims are the types of statements that can be true or false they are truth apt B. The truth or falsity of a moral claim does not depend on when where or by whom the claim is made iv. Intuitively, according to ACCR

A. There is indeed a fact (or facts) of the matter about moral claims B. Which facts? Facts about the moral code that prevails in the relevant agent s culture C. It s just that there are different relevant facts for different agents f. Skeptical Objection to Agent Centered Cultural Relativism i. If ACCR is correct, then we can t coherently criticize the moral codes of other cultures A. If a person is conforming to the moral code of their own culture B. They are not doing anything morally wrong C. Even if they are performing actions or engaging in practices that from the point of view of our moral code 1. Are prohibited 2. Even if they strike us as egregiously wrong or immoral D. Examples 1. Suttee: throwing widows on their husbands funeral pyres by members Hindu cultures that require suttee 2. Slavery: the owning of other human beings by people living in the pre-civil War American South (and many other cultures, too) 3. Terrorism: Use of guerilla tactics on civilians to achieve social justice by members of Al Qaeda ii. Seems absurd! V. Emotivism A. Preliminaries 1. Emotivism is motivated by the same types of considerations that motivated SS a. People often have very strong views on moral issues i. Feel deep convictions about their positions ii. They argue about those questions and issues passionately b. Emotivism is another metaethical theory that i. Attempts to account for this feature of morality ii. Make sense of the connection between moral claims and emotions 2. However, emotivism provides an importantly different way of understanding the relation between moral claims and feelings, emotions and attitudes 3. Important distinction a. Emotivists point to the important distinction between

i. Asserting (or stating) that you have a feeling or are experiencing an feeling, emotion or attitude ii. Expressing a feeling, emotion or attitude b. Some examples (that are not moral claims) i. The feeling of pain A. Asserting: I am in severe pain 1. Ouch! 2. Shaking the thumb that you just accidentally whacked with a hammer ii. The emotion of disgust A. Asserting: deep fried Twinkies disgust me 1. Blah! Yuk! 2. Recoiling in revulsion, making that disgust face iii. Humor A. Asserting: I found that joke quite humorous 1. Ha ha ha! 2. Slapping knee iv. Attitudes of approval A. Asserting: I approve of what the Purdue basketball team just did 1. Yeah! 2. Hurray! 3. Go Boilers! 4. Clapping v. Attitudes of disapproval A. Asserting: I disapprove of the job this referee is doing 1. Boo! 2. Argh! 3. Impolite hand gestures c. Note that assertions of feelings, emotions and attitudes are statements that can be either true or false they re truth apt d. Expressions of feelings, emotions and attitudes are not they are not truth apt i. Emotive behaviors like clapping or slapping one s knee are obviously not true or false ii. Linguistic expressions of feelings emotions and attitudes are merely verbal ways of emoting iii. Like questions or commands, such expressions are a part of language that just isn t in the business of being true or false at all B. Basic Idea of Emotivism: expressions and moral claims

1. Recall that SS held that moral claims are really disguised assertions about the feelings, emotions and attitudes of the speaker 2. Emotivism holds, instead, that moral claims are really disguised expressions of the feelings, emotions and attitudes of the speaker 3. Some examples a. Abortion is morally wrong really means something like, Boo! Abortion or Abortion Grrr! b. Smoking marijuana is morally permissible really means something like Hurray for smoking marijuana! or Smoking marijuana Yeah! 4. According to emotivism a. Moral claims do not purport to describe any sort of facts i. Neither facts about the psychological states of individual speakers ii. Nor facts about moral codes or God s will b. Instead, they express something the speaker feels 5. For obvious reasons, emotivism is sometimes called The Boo!/Yeah! Theory C. Emotivism and the magnetic effect of moral claims 1. Emotivists claim that unlike some other types of emotive expressions moral claims also have an inherently magnetic effect a. Invites and draws listeners to emulate the speaker b. Pulls them have the same type of feeling, emotion or attitude as the speaker is expressing 2. Emotivists point out that this feature of moral claims can be very useful for a speaker trying to persuade listeners to a. Share the feeling emotion or attitude being expressed b. Thus to share the moral attitudes of the speaker 3. Emotivists also suggest that this magnetic effect is particular powerful due conditioning we receive in early childhood when we learn about morality for the first time 4. A fuller emotivist account of the meaning of moral claims, that accounts for this magnetic effect, would be a. Abortion is morally wrong really means something like i. Boo! Abortion; please share this feeling or Abortion Grrr!; please share this emotion b. Smoking marijuana is morally permissible really means something like i. Hurray for smoking marijuana!; please share attitude or ii. Smoking marijuana Yeah!; please share this feeling D. Advantages of Emotivism 1. Easily makes sense of the relation between morality and emotion a. Provides a plausible explanation for why many moral debates are so emotionally charged b. Provides a plausible explanation of moral motivation i. Why does anyone bother to actually act morally?

ii. Because feelings and emotions are intrinsically motivating psychological states 2. Emotivism avoids the simplicity and absurd consequences of simple subjectivism a. On SS, moral disagreement would be an illusion b. On SS, attempts at persuasion are confused or incoherent 3. Emotivism is much better that SS at making sense out of moral disagreement, moral argument and the practice of trying to persuade others by giving reasons for your views a. According to Emotivism, moral argument is an attempt to i. Trying to persuade people to share your feelings, emotions and attitudes about moral issues ii. Usually by utilizing the magnetic effect of moral claims and exploiting links to other emotions iii. For example, imagine two people arguing about whether or not capital punishment is moral A. Person R is in favor of capital punishment B. Person D is against it 1. D might point out that that there have been many cases in which innocent people have been executed 2. If R has strong feelings about executing innocent people, this might changes R s feelings about capitals punishment