MetaEthics
Metaethics examines the nature, meaning, and justification of moral claims rather than prescribing specific moral rules. This branch of inquiry explores questions such as whether moral truths are objective or subjective, whether ethical statements express facts or emotions, and how moral knowledge is possible. Major positions include: moral realism, which holds that moral truths exist independently of human opinion; relativism, which ties moral judgments to cultural or individual perspectives; and expressivism, which interprets moral statements as expressions of attitudes rather than factual claims. By analyzing the foundations of ethical reasoning, metaethics provides the conceptual tools necessary to understand and evaluate competing moral theories, shaping debates across philosophy, law, and public policy.
James Rachels — Simple Subjectivism
Rachels argues that subjectivism does not allow for any individual to make a direct stance on a moral claim’s truth, but rather express their approval or disapproval or emotions. Through a simple subjectivist lens, if a person says “I think murder is wrong,” what they are really saying is “I disapprove of murder.” Through an emotivist lens, they would really be saying “I feel negatively about murder.” Neither statements discuss the moral nature of murder itself, rather discussing the individual.
This framework runs into an important issue, which is the lack of true disagreement. For true disagreement to occur, there must be an objective truth to argue over. Essentially, since there are no objective moral facts, if people disagree over moral ideas then in reality they are disagreeing over their attitudes towards certain actions, not the action itself. Since attitude is subjective, both individuals will always be right no matter this stance. Thus, if one determines that morality is subjective, there can be no moral disagreement which indicates a falsity in that statement.
Russ Shafer-Landau — Eleven Arguments Against Objectivity
Shafer-Landau explores diverse arguments against moral objectivism. These include claims that morality cannot be objective due to cultural variation and the existence of moral disagreement. He systematically introduces then breaks down each argument, thus concluding that these arguments fall short of exposing the falsity of moral objectivity. For the argument of cultural variation, Shafer-Landau stipulates that while surface level customs and applications may differ widely across cultures, the deep-rooted moral code that each culture follows maintains its integrity. For moral disagreement, he analyses Rachels’ theory about true disagreement only being possible through moral objectivity. Overall, Shafer-Laundau is able to disprove the validity of arguments against moral objectivity.
Muñoz & Stroud, Chapter 7 and 10 - Well-Being and Value; Belief and Ignorance
Chapter 7 (Well-Being and Value) introduces thought experiments such as the Experience Machine and immortality, using these to examine what causes life to hold importance. Metaethically, they raise the question of whether value is objective or dependent on mental states. A subjectivist would argue that value is grounded in an individual’s pleasure or experience. An objectivist would view value as independent of a viewer’s experience - that there is an inherent value in everything regardless of recognition of that value.
Chapter 10 (Belief and Ignorance) examines cases discussing moral uncertainty, cluelessness, and the extent knowledge informs morality in believing. These cases question how possible it is to know what the objective moral truths of the world are, and if individuals can be unintentionally immoral by failing to abide by these hidden codes. This raises the issue of whether moral judgments can ever be objectively correct if humans lack full information of moral codes. Overall, the chapter emphasizes that morality is deeply tied to epistemology—how we know, justify, and remain responsible for moral claims.
Together, the two chapters reveal a central metaethical insight: ethical theory is not just about deciding right and wrong, but about understanding the nature of value and the limits of moral knowledge, including whether moral truths are objective, how they are justified, and how uncertainty shapes moral responsibility.
Access these readings below