Moral Objectivism and Nature of Ethical Non - Objectivism

Moral Objectivism and Nature of Ethical Non- objectivism

Moral objectivism tries to unlock the stalemate that incomprehensibility of perfection in our various societal set-ups does not automatically attribute to inexistence to it. Moral objectivism goes far beyond the boundary of secular acts and conservative associated with religion and our cultural beliefs. It is fully secular and neither liberal nor conservational. Moral objectivism recognizes and upholds various secular and moral principles in any social set-up and further upholds secular moral foundation of a fully-free and a fully-civilized society.

According to Pearson in White's book, Tort law in America intellectual history, ethical non-objectivism asserts that there are no objective moral facts, and that moral principles do not exist (2003). All these come as a result of our emotions. In our emotions, there are absolutely no objective moral truths to discover.

For instance, ethically, it is a fact that stealing is unacceptable and morally bad. However this may not be true according to the proponents of Utilitarianism ethical theory Jeremy Bentham and John Stewart Mills. In support of their theory, what is good or bad is whether it produces greatest amount of pain or happiness. In their example, they posed a case of a man stealing from a rich man owning a store outlet and feeding thousands of orphans. There was great happiness than pain in that case hence making stealing not bad.

Moral objectivism philosophy advocates the virtue of rational self-interest, independent thinking, honesty, productiveness and self-responsibility. It is therefore easy to determine whether one is morally objectivist by the way they present themselves starting with their dressing which clearly indicates their level of self-responsibility.

Additionally, evaluation how one participates in an open discussion and whether their contributions are influenced by factors beyond them such as cultural belief can clearly indicate whether they are objectivist or not. Moreover, their approach on controversial discussions can depict their level of self-interest which is an indicator of moral objectivism.

References

White, G. E. (2003). Tort law in America: an intellectual history (Expanded