Meta-ethical views.
Meta-ethical is the study about what morals claim about. This paper will discuss ethical objectivism, moral skepticism, ethical relativism, and ethical subjectivism found in the book
He was good at elucidating on the ethical issues and helpfully diagraphs major ethical arguments and against moral scepticism which helps understands when things are wrong. For a case to be false, the premises must either be incorrect, or the logic is invalid.
He tries to rescue moral objectivism, which is the idea that individual moral judgments are indeed incorrect or correct, everywhere and always and are independent of who utters them and from which culture. Landau does this in a particular way and tries to demolish the case with the following; any form of moral objectivism can be logically disproven who some have been logically proven.
Moral objectivism, in his case, is about reassuring. It allows ordinary moral discourse to have a point which I wish it were true, and on reading this book about defense from a believer, I believe the above statement is true.. Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
The idea of free will in the status of moral statements falls under the philosophical cloud. Most people believe in their hearts that they have free will, but from the philosophical arguments is against it and looks wildly implausible. When people argue about moral values, it’s similar, they say from the background of assumptions that some benefits are plain run and not conventionally right.
The arguments in this book about ethics and God is the reason why he put it in question as to why we think morals need a lawgiver when we don’t believe in man other laws that are found in the universe. The explanations are clear, concise, and the arguments precise, and the analysis found against moral objectivism. He could have said more about how moral objectivity can be discussed without invoking God. His case is right, but lies one of his major weaknesses. He has represented the theist as having to hold to a “law-maker” idea, which dispatches with the typical his earlier argument.
Work Cited
Shafer-Landau, Russ. Whatever happened to good and evil?. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.