Moral Realism and Anti-Realism

Moral realism is the view that moral facts or truths exist objectively, independently of human thought or belief. In other words, moral claims are true or false regardless of what people think or feel about them. This view holds that there are objective moral standards that apply universally to all people, and that these standards are discovered rather than invented.

Moral anti-realism, on the other hand, denies the existence of objective moral facts or truths. Instead, this view holds that moral claims are either subjective or relative, depending on the individual or culture making them. Moral anti-realists may hold that moral claims are expressions of personal preference or social convention, rather than statements of objective fact.

Argument for Moral Realism

A common argument for moral realism is the argument from moral disagreement. This argument holds that the existence of widespread and deep moral disagreements across cultures and time periods suggests that there is a fact of the matter about what is morally right or wrong. If there were no objective moral truth, there would be no basis for moral disagreement, since all moral claims would be equally valid.

Examples of Moral Realist and Anti-Realist Positions

Examples of moral realist positions include:

• Ethical naturalism, which holds that moral facts are reducible to natural facts
• Divine command theory, which holds that moral facts are grounded in the commands of a divine being

Examples of moral anti-realist positions include:

• Emotivism, which holds that moral claims are expressions of emotion rather than fact
• Relativism, which holds that moral claims are relative to the individual or culture making them.

All courses were automatically generated using OpenAI's GPT-3. Your feedback helps us improve as we cannot manually review every course. Thank you!