Philosophy Now Forum

After our recent ‘Death of Morality’ issue, Mitchell Silver replies to the amoralists.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/83/Our ... bjectivism

Mitchell Silver appears to be confused. Even if it were the case that despite being an avowed moral subjectivist my behaviour were such that I could be deemed a moral objectivist, that would not serve to make moral objectivism valid. That would just make me inconsistent.

Actually, our author is merely projecting his subjective truth onto reality. When he says things like "If you accept permissibility rules then you are a moral objectivist", this is best interpreted as "I am a person who uses the term "moral objectivist" to describe someone who accepts permissibility rules." His justification for using the term in that way is conspicuously absent.

Moral objectivism requires...... a combination of myopia, tunnel vision and navel gazing.

You sit on the plane and travel somewhere and call that "traffic" yet the "traffic" of people is something you deny! Weird! Implausible! Navel gazing?