Moral nihilism - Wikipedia Moral nihilism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia   (Redirected from Error theory) Jump to navigation Jump to search This article is about the meta-ethical position. For a more general discussion of amoralism, see amorality. Part of a series on Nihilism The Nihilist by Paul Merwart Origins Fichteanism Nominalism Reductionism Russian nihilism Skepticism Concepts Amorality Anomie Après moi, le déluge God is dead Last man Meaninglessness Nonexistence Nothingness Paradox of nihilism Valuelessness Theories Philosophical nihilism Epistemological Existential Mereological Metaphysical Moral Ontological Other theories Legal National Political Scientific Therapeutic Theoreticians Russian nihilists Mikhail Bakunin Nikolay Chernyshevsky Nikolay Dobrolyubov Sofya Kovalevskaya Sergey Nechayev Dmitry Pisarev Varfolomey Zaytsev Other theoreticians Nihilists Non-nihilists Theodor Adorno Jean Baudrillard Buddha Albert Camus Emil Cioran Gilles Deleuze Fyodor Dostoevsky Gorgias Hegesias of Cyrene Martin Heidegger Friedrich Jacobi Søren Kierkegaard Philipp Mainländer Friedrich Nietzsche Keiji Nishitani Seraphim Rose Jean-Paul Sartre Oswald Spengler Max Stirner Leo Strauss Helmut Thielicke Jun Tsuji Ivan Turgenev Related topics Absurdism Anarchism Antifoundationalism Antinatalism Antinihilistic novel Atheism Egoism Existentialism Misanthropy Nietzschean affirmation Pessimism Philosophy of suicide Postmodernity Solipsism  Philosophy portal  Religion portal v t e Moral nihilism (also known as ethical nihilism) is the meta-ethical view that nothing is morally right or wrong.[1][2] Moral nihilism is distinct from moral relativism, which allows for actions to be wrong relative to a particular culture or individual. It is also distinct from expressivism, according to which when we make moral claims, "We are not making an effort to describe the way the world is ... we are venting our emotions, commanding others to act in certain ways, or revealing a plan of action".[3] Moral nihilism broadly today tends to take the form of an Error Theory: The view developed originally by J.L. Mackie in his 1977 book Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. Error theory and nihilism broadly take the form of a negative claim about the existence of objective values or properties. Under traditional views there are moral properties or methods which hold objectively in some sense beyond our contingent interests which morally obligate us to act. For Mackie and the Error theorists, such properties do not exist in the world, and therefore morality conceived of by reference to objective facts must also not exist. Therefore, morality in the traditional sense does not exist. However, holding nihilism does not necessarily imply that we should give up using moral or ethical language; some nihilists contend that it remains a useful tool[4] In fact Mackie and other contemporary defenders of Error Theory (Richard Joyce, etc) defend the use of moral or ethical talk and action even in knowledge of their fundamental falsity. The legitimacy of this activity however is questionable and is a subject of great debate in philosophy at the moment. Contents 1 Forms of nihilism 1.1 Ethical language: false versus not truth-apt 1.2 The scope question 2 Arguments for nihilism 2.1 Argument from queerness 2.1.1 Responses and criticisms 2.2 Argument from explanatory impotence 3 See also 4 Citations 5 Bibliography 6 Further reading Forms of nihilism[edit] Moral nihilists agree that all claims such as 'murder is morally wrong' are not true. But different nihilistic views differ in two ways. Some may say that such claims are neither true nor false; others say that they are all false. Nihilists differ in the scope of their theories. Error theorists typically claim that it is only distinctively moral claims which are false; practical nihilists claim that there are no reasons for action of any kind; some nihilists extend this claim to include reasons for belief. Ethical language: false versus not truth-apt[edit] J. L. Mackie argues that moral assertions are only true if there are moral properties, but because there are none, all such claims are false.[5] Under such a view moral propositions which express beliefs are then systematically in error. For under Mackie's view, if there are to be moral properties, they must be objective and therefore not amenable to differences in subjective desires and preferences. Moreover any claims that these moral properties, if they did exist would need to be intrinsically motivating by being in some primitive relation to our consciousness. They must be able of guiding us morally just by the fact of being in some clear awareness of their truth. But this is not the case, and such ideas in his views are plainly queer. Other versions of the theory claim that moral assertions are not true because they are neither true nor false. This form of moral nihilism claims that moral beliefs and assertions presuppose the existence of moral facts that do not exist. Consider, for example, the claim that the present king of France is bald. Some argue that this claim is neither true nor false because it presupposes that there is currently a king of France, but there is not. The claim suffers from "presupposition failure". Richard Joyce[6] argues for this form of moral nihilism under the name "fictionalism". The scope question[edit] Error theory is built on three principles: There are no moral features in this world; nothing is right or wrong. Therefore, no moral judgments are true; however, Our sincere moral judgments try, but always fail, to describe the moral features of things. Thus, we always lapse into error when thinking in moral terms. We are trying to state the truth when we make moral judgments. But since there is no moral truth, all of our moral claims are mistaken. Hence the error. These three principles lead to the conclusion that there is no moral knowledge. Knowledge requires truth. If there is no moral truth, there can be no moral knowledge. Thus moral values are purely chimerical.[3][7] Arguments for nihilism[edit] Argument from queerness[edit] The most prominent argument for nihilism is the argument from queerness. J. L. Mackie argues that there are no objective ethical values, by arguing that they would be queer (strange): If there were objective values, then they would be entities or qualities or relations of a very strange sort, utterly different from anything else in the universe.[8] For all those who also find such entities queer (prima facie implausible), there is reason to doubt the existence of objective values. In his book Morality without Foundations: A Defense of Ethical Contextualism (1999), Mark Timmons provides a reconstruction of Mackie's views in the form of the two related arguments. These are based on the rejection of properties, facts, and relationships that do not fit within the worldview of philosophical naturalism, the idea "that everything—including any particular events, facts, properties, and so on—is part of the natural physical world that science investigates" (1999, p. 12). Timmons adds, "The undeniable attraction of this outlook in contemporary philosophy no doubt stems from the rise of modern science and the belief that science is our best avenue for discovering the nature of reality".[9] There are several ways in which moral properties are supposedly queer: our ordinary moral discourse purports to refer to intrinsically prescriptive properties and facts "that would somehow motivate us or provide us with reasons for action independent of our desires and aversions"—but such properties and facts do not comport with philosophical naturalism.[10] given that objective moral properties supposedly supervene upon natural properties (such as biological or psychological properties), the relation between the moral properties and the natural properties is metaphysically mysterious and does not comport with philosophical naturalism.[11] a moral realist who countenances the existence of metaphysically queer properties, facts, and relations must also posit some special faculty by which we have knowledge of them.[11] Responses and criticisms[edit] Christine Korsgaard responds to Mackie by saying: Of course there are entities that meet these criteria. It's true that they are queer sorts of entities and that knowing them isn't like anything else. But that doesn't mean that they don't exist.... For it is the most familiar fact of human life that the world contains entities that can tell us what to do and make us do it. They are people, and the other animals.[12] Other criticisms of the argument include noting that for the very fact that such entities would have to be something fundamentally different from what we normally experience—and therefore assumably outside our sphere of experience—we cannot prima facie have reason to either doubt or affirm their existence; therefore, if one had independent grounds for supposing such things to exist (such as, for instance, a reductio ad absurdum of the contrary) then the argument from queerness cannot give one any particular reason to think otherwise. An argument along these lines has been provided by e.g. Akeel Bilgrami.[13] Argument from explanatory impotence[edit] Gilbert Harman argued that we do not need to posit the existence of objective values in order to explain our 'moral observations'.[14] See also[edit] Eliminativism Egoist anarchism Evolution of morality Existential nihilism Illegalism Non-cognitivism Metaethics Might makes right Moral relativism Moral skepticism Perspectivism Psychological determinism Reductionism Transcendental nihilism Citations[edit] ^ Sinnott-Armstrong 2019. ^ Pratt n.d. ^ a b Shafer-Landau 2010, pp. 292–293. ^ (Pratt n.d.) ^ Mackie 1977,[page needed]. ^ Joyce 2001,[page needed]. ^ Shafer-Landau 2018,[page needed]. ^ Mackie 1977, p. 38. ^ Timmons 1999, pp. 12–13. ^ Timmons 1999, p. 50. ^ a b Timmons 1999, p. 51. ^ Korsgaard 1996, p. 166. ^ Bilgrami 2006. ^ Harman 1977, chapter 1. Bibliography[edit] Pratt, Alan (n.d.). "Nihilism". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. ISSN 2161-0002. Retrieved 2020-12-01. Bilgrami, Akeel (2006). Self-Knowledge and Resentment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Harman, Gilbert (1977). The Nature of Morality: An Introduction to Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195021431. OCLC 2725781. Joyce, Richard (2001). The Myth of Morality. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Korsgaard, Christine (1996). The Sources of Normativity. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Mackie, John (1977). Ethics: inventing right and wrong. London. ISBN 0140135588. OCLC 24729622. Shafer-Landau, Russ (2010). The Fundamentals of Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-063139-0. Shafer-Landau, Russ (2018). The Fundamentals of Ethics (fourth ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-532086-2. Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter (2019), Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), "Moral Skepticism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2019 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 2020-05-28 Timmons, Mark (1999). Morality without Foundations: A Defense of Ethical Contextualism. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. . Further reading[edit] Garner, Richard T.; Bernard Rosen (1967). Moral Philosophy: A Systematic Introduction to Normative Ethics and Meta-ethics, New York: Macmillan. Garner, Richard T.; (1994). Beyond Morality. Temple University Press. Shafer-Landau, Russ (2003). Whatever Happened to Good and Evil?, Oxford University Press. Shafer-Landau, Russ & Terence Cuneo (eds.) (2007). Foundations of Ethics, Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter (2006a). "Moral Skepticism," The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.). (link) Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter (2006b). Moral Skepticisms, Oxford University Press. van Roojen, Mark (2004). "Moral Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism," The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.). (link) About the queerness argument Brink, David O. (1984). "Moral Realism and the Sceptical Arguments from Disagreement and Queerness", Australasian Journal of Philosophy 62(2): 111–125. Garner, Richard T. (1990). "On the Genuine Queerness of Moral Properties and Facts", Australasian Journal of Philosophy 68(2): 137–46. Mackie, J. L. (1946). "A Refutation of Morals", Australasian Journal of Psychology and Philosophy 24: 77–90. doi:10.1080/00048404608541486 Rosati, Connie S. (2006). "Moral Motivation", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.). Shepski, Lee (2008). "The Vanishing Argument from Queerness", Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86(3): 371–87. v t e Philosophy Branches Traditional Metaphysics Epistemology Logic Ethics Aesthetics Philosophy of... Action Color Culture Design Music Film Cosmology Education Environment Geography Happiness History Human nature Humor Feminism Language Law Life Literature Mathematics Medicine Healthcare Psychiatry Mind Pain Psychology Perception Philosophy Religion Science Physics Chemistry Biology Sexuality Social science Business Culture Economics Politics Society Space and time Sport Technology Artificial intelligence Computer science Engineering Information War Schools of thought By era Ancient Western Medieval Renaissance Early modern Modern Contemporary Ancient Chinese Agriculturalism Confucianism Legalism Logicians Mohism Chinese naturalism Neotaoism Taoism Yangism Chan Greco-Roman Aristotelianism Atomism Cynicism Cyrenaics Eleatics Eretrian school Epicureanism Hermeneutics Ionian Ephesian Milesian Megarian school Neoplatonism Peripatetic Platonism Pluralism Presocratic Pyrrhonism Pythagoreanism Neopythagoreanism Sophistic Stoicism Indian Hindu Samkhya Nyaya Vaisheshika Yoga Mīmāṃsā Ājīvika Ajñana Cārvāka Jain Anekantavada Syādvāda Buddhist Śūnyatā Madhyamaka Yogacara Sautrāntika Svatantrika Persian Mazdakism Mithraism Zoroastrianism Zurvanism Medieval European Christian Augustinianism Scholasticism Thomism Scotism Occamism Renaissance humanism East Asian Korean Confucianism Edo neo-Confucianism Neo-Confucianism Indian Vedanta Acintya bheda abheda Advaita Bhedabheda Dvaita Nimbarka Sampradaya Shuddhadvaita Vishishtadvaita Navya-Nyāya Islamic Averroism Avicennism Illuminationism ʿIlm al-Kalām Sufi Jewish Judeo-Islamic Modern People Cartesianism Kantianism Neo-Kantianism Hegelianism Marxism Spinozism 0 Anarchism Classical Realism Liberalism Collectivism Conservatism Determinism Dualism Empiricism Existentialism Foundationalism Historicism Holism Humanism Anti- Idealism Absolute British German Objective Subjective Transcendental Individualism Kokugaku Materialism Modernism Monism Naturalism Natural law Nihilism New Confucianism Neo-scholasticism Pragmatism Phenomenology Positivism Reductionism Rationalism Social contract Socialism Transcendentalism Utilitarianism Contemporary Analytic Applied ethics Analytic feminism Analytical Marxism Communitarianism Consequentialism Critical rationalism Experimental philosophy Falsificationism Foundationalism / Coherentism Internalism and externalism Logical positivism Legal positivism Normative ethics Meta-ethics Moral realism Quinean naturalism Ordinary language philosophy Postanalytic philosophy Quietism Rawlsian Reformed epistemology Systemics Scientism Scientific realism Scientific skepticism Transactionalism Contemporary utilitarianism Vienna Circle Wittgensteinian Continental Critical theory Deconstruction Existentialism Feminist Frankfurt School New Historicism Hermeneutics Neo-Marxism Phenomenology Posthumanism Postmodernism Post-structuralism Social constructionism Structuralism Western Marxism Other Kyoto School Objectivism Postcritique Russian cosmism more... Positions Aesthetics Formalism Institutionalism Aesthetic response Ethics Consequentialism Deontology Virtue Free will Compatibilism Determinism Hard Incompatibilism Hard Libertarianism Metaphysics Atomism Dualism Idealism Monism Naturalism Realism Epistemology Empiricism Fideism Naturalism Particularism Rationalism Skepticism Solipsism Mind Behaviorism Emergentism Eliminativism Epiphenomenalism Functionalism Objectivism Subjectivism Normativity Absolutism Particularism Relativism Nihilism Skepticism Universalism Ontology Action Event Process Reality Anti-realism Conceptualism Idealism Materialism Naturalism Nominalism Physicalism Realism By region Related lists Miscellaneous By region African Ethiopian Amerindian Aztec Eastern Chinese Egyptian Indian Indonesian Iranian Japanese Korean Taiwanese Pakistani Vietnamese Middle Eastern Western American Australian British Czech Danish French German Greek Italian Polish Romanian Russian Slovene Spanish Turkish Lists Outline Index Years Problems Schools Glossary Philosophers Movements Publications Miscellaneous Natural law Sage Theoretical philosophy / Practical philosophy Women in philosophy Portal Category Book v t e Ethics Normative ethics Consequentialism Utilitarianism Deontology Kantian ethics Ethics of care Existentialist ethics Particularism Pragmatic ethics Role ethics Virtue ethics Eudaimonism Applied ethics Animal ethics Bioethics Business ethics Discourse ethics Engineering ethics Environmental ethics Legal ethics Machine ethics Media ethics Medical ethics Nursing ethics Professional ethics Sexual ethics Ethics of artificial intelligence Ethics of eating meat Ethics of technology Ethics of terraforming Ethics of uncertain sentience Meta-ethics Cognitivism Moral realism Ethical naturalism Ethical non-naturalism Ethical subjectivism Ideal observer theory Divine command theory Error theory Non-cognitivism Emotivism Expressivism Quasi-realism Universal prescriptivism Moral universalism Value monism – Value pluralism Moral relativism Moral nihilism Moral rationalism Ethical intuitionism Moral skepticism Concepts Autonomy Axiology Conscience Consent Equality Free will Good and evil Good Evil Happiness Ideal Immorality Justice Liberty Morality Norm Freedom Suffering or Pain Stewardship Sympathy Trust Value Virtue Wrong full index... Philosophers Laozi Socrates Plato Aristotle Diogenes Valluvar Cicero Confucius Augustine of Hippo Mencius Mozi Xunzi Thomas Aquinas Baruch Spinoza David Hume Immanuel Kant Georg W. F. Hegel Arthur Schopenhauer Jeremy Bentham John Stuart Mill Søren Kierkegaard Henry Sidgwick Friedrich Nietzsche G. E. Moore Karl Barth Paul Tillich Dietrich Bonhoeffer Philippa Foot John Rawls John Dewey Bernard Williams J. L. Mackie G. E. M. Anscombe William Frankena Alasdair MacIntyre R. M. Hare Peter Singer Derek Parfit Thomas Nagel Robert Merrihew Adams Charles Taylor Joxe Azurmendi Christine Korsgaard Martha Nussbaum more... Related articles Casuistry Christian ethics Descriptive ethics Ethics in religion Evolutionary ethics Feminist ethics History of ethics Ideology Islamic ethics Jewish ethics Moral psychology Philosophy of law Political philosophy Population ethics Social philosophy Category Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moral_nihilism&oldid=996075800#The_scope_question" Categories: Amorality Ethical theories Meta-ethics Morality Nihilism Philosophical arguments Hidden categories: Wikipedia articles needing page number citations from May 2020 Use shortened footnotes from December 2020 Articles containing French-language text Navigation menu Personal tools Not logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in Namespaces Article Talk Variants Views Read Edit View history More Search Navigation Main page Contents Current events Random article About Wikipedia Contact us Donate Contribute Help Learn to edit Community portal Recent changes Upload file Tools What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Permanent link Page information Cite this page Wikidata item Print/export Download as PDF Printable version Languages Azərbaycanca Español Français 한국어 Bahasa Indonesia Latina 日本語 Русский Српски / srpski Türkçe 中文 Edit links This page was last edited on 24 December 2020, at 11:17 (UTC). Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Mobile view Developers Statistics Cookie statement