Subjectivists about morality say that all of our moral judgments are about nothing more than our personal preferences. Objectivists, on the other hand, claim that our moral valuations are based on a human-independent realm of moral facts. Is there a way to reconcile these two opposing views? In this first part of a two-part series, Leslie Allan will get us thinking about this vexed problem by introducing us to a typical everyday moral argument. He’ll then discuss how four dominant views in moral philosophy seriously misconstrue how ethics can be objective. By properly contrasting different senses of ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’, Leslie will go on to articulate how being objective in moral reasoning does not preclude a necessary subjective element as well.
