Objectivity of moral judgements
1. Objectivity vs. Subjectivity in Moral Judgments
Objectivity: Moral judgments are independent of individual feelings and must be assessed
through more objective standards. These standards are usually shaped by societal or universal
principles.
Subjectivity: Alternatively, some argue that moral judgments are subjective, dependent on the
individual's feelings and perceptions, influenced by their moral consciousness.
2. The Nature of Moral Standards
A Priori Moral Intuitions: These are fundamental moral beliefs that are self-evident and cannot
be further analyzed. They are inherent to human reasoning, much like basic mathematical
principles.
Intrinsic vs. Instrumental Goods:
i. Intrinsic Goods: Goods like love, beauty, and friendship have intrinsic value. These
values are self-evident but cannot be universally defined or deduced without experience.
ii. Instrumental Goods: These are values that promote intrinsic goods. For example, virtues
are instrumental goods that help increase love and beauty.
3. Three Axioms of good
a. Henry Sidgwick, an influential philosopher in ethics, identified three axioms of the good that he
believed were fundamental to understanding moral judgments. These axioms are:
i. Justice: This refers to the fair and equitable treatment of individuals, ensuring that they
receive what they are due. Justice is often concerned with the distribution of benefits and
burdens within a society.
ii. Prudence: This involves the ability to make decisions based on the long-term well-being
of oneself. It is the virtue of being wise and cautious about one’s actions to secure future
happiness or avoid harm.
iii. Benevolence: This refers to the moral imperative to promote the welfare of others.
Benevolence involves caring for the well-being of others and acting in ways that benefit
them, even at personal cost.
4. Tests for Moral Judgments
Utilitarian Test:
i. Identify the good with pleasure, and measure it quantitatively
ii. This test identifies the "good" with pleasure, aiming to maximize happiness by choosing
actions that benefit the greatest number.
iii. Also called “Teleological”
Kantian Test:
i. The good is its coherence with a rule or law
ii. According to this test, moral actions must be consistent with universal laws or principles
that could be applied universally. It emphasizes coherence with rational, universal moral
laws.
iii. Also called “Deontological”
5. Revisions in Moral Judgments Over Time
However, decisions can be rendered only in the light of the knowledge and experience available
to the age.
There is no way to be absolutely sure that future ages, with wider experience and greater social
and economic achievements, will decide in all cases as we have done
Moral judgments are subject to revision based on new experiences, data, and societal changes.
As human knowledge and societal conditions evolve, moral judgments may shift.
Comparative ethics, which analyzes different moral systems, reveals that moral progress has
occurred over time.
Plurality of Moral Judgements
1. Moral Standards
Self-Respect Standard: This is the baseline for moral expectations and behaviors. It defines the
basic moral principles we hold ourselves to, ensuring that we do not degrade our own dignity.
Aspirational Standard: A higher moral standard that emerges when we feel dissatisfied with our
self-respect standards. It motivates us to strive for moral progress and improvement.
Inspirational Standard: This represents moral perfection and serves as an ideal to which we may
compare all other moral standards. It is not a standard we typically try to achieve but use to
evaluate our progress toward perfection.
2. Moral Rules vs. Moral Standards
Moral Rules:
i. These provide explicit guidelines on how we should act, directing specific behaviors and
actions.
ii. Meant to enforce, prescribe what actions to take
Moral Standards:
i. More general than rules, moral standards offer a framework for evaluating actions based
on established rules. They help us judge our actions as either aligned or misaligned with
moral expectations.
ii. Relate with moral judgments; how actions are evaluated based on the rules
2. Aspects of morality
Obligational Aspect
Aspirational-Inspirational Aspect
Heroes and Saints
i. Too taxing, we can choose to become better persons instead
3. Function of Moral Standards
Moral standards help us avoid moral decline and enable us to recover from moral failures. They
promote moral growth by encouraging us to aim for higher ideals.
Self-Respect Standards:
i. Best understood on occasions where we experience the shame of lost self – respect
a. Due to our violation of a rule
b. Due to an awareness of the lowness of our standards – rising to a new level
ii. Protect us from moral decay and allow us to restore our moral health if we fail to meet
our expectations.
Aspirational Standards:
i. Stimulates us to be morally healthy so that we grow morally
ii. Tool for moral progress
iii. Learning to control our moral satisfaction
iv. Push us toward higher moral goals and serve as tools for moral progress.
4. Issues of Moral Standards
Ought does not imply can
Knowing does not lead to doing
5. Evident Truisms
One cannot estimate one’s moral potential
Moral potentialities are inestimable since moral progress can be achieved between birth and
death
One can have genuine religious conversion
Universal and Supervenient Properties
1. Universal Properties:
Universality refers to the idea that certain moral principles or rules apply to all rational agents
in all situations.
Not all truths or facts about the universe are empirical ones.
A universal moral truth is one that holds universally, regardless of the circumstances or
individuals involved.
For example, the principle of honesty can be considered a universal moral rule because it is
applicable to all people in all times and places.
2. Supervenience:
Moral properties supervene (depend on, emerge upon) natural ones
i. Badness as a supervenient property of the natural property of pain, goodness is of
happiness
A philosophical concept where one set of properties (such as moral properties) is said to depend
on another set (such as non-moral or natural properties).
In the context of ethics, the idea of moral supervenience suggests that any change in the moral
properties of an action, situation, or person must be based on some underlying change in the non-
moral or natural properties.
This means that moral truths are dependent on the facts about the world, and any moral judgment
must be grounded in these facts.
Counter-argument for Moral Nihilism (Tinatamad na ko iiklian ko na lang)
We can theorize about sentience, holding that sentient beings desire happiness or pleasure and avoid
pain or suffering. Moral principles are guides to action that, among other things, promote happiness and
reduce suffering. If principle P promotes happiness or lessens suffering, then P qualifies as a moral
principle. We can assume that morality is not empirical in nature, but rather a functional institution that
concerns promoting happiness and reducing suffering. This answer agrees with Harman’s argument that
scientific and moral principles are tested differently but says that the difference doesn’t matter. Each
principle is true in its own sphere.
