Explain the argument from disagreement. How does the objectivist respond to this argument? Is there a way to modify the argument to avoid the objectivist's response? Explain and defend your answer.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Answer is The argument from disagreement is the idea that because people disagree about moral issues, there is no objective truth about morality. This argument suggests that if there were objective moral truths, then everyone would agree on them.

The objectivist responds to this argument by pointing out that disagreement does not necessarily mean that there is no objective truth. People can disagree about many things, but that doesn't mean that there is no objective truth about those things. For example, people used to disagree about whether the earth was flat or round, but that didn't mean that there was no objective truth about the shape of the earth.

One way to modify the argument to avoid the objectivist's response is to focus on the nature of moral disagreement. If it can be shown that moral disagreement is fundamentally different from other types of disagreement, then the objectivist's response may not be as effective. For example, if it can be shown that moral disagreement is not just a matter of differing opinions, but is instead a result of fundamental differences in values or beliefs, then the objectivist's response may not apply.

In conclusion, the argument from disagreement suggests that because people disagree about moral issues, there is no objective truth about morality. The objectivist responds by pointing out that disagreement does not necessarily mean that there is no objective truth. However, the argument can be modified to focus on the nature of moral disagreement in order to avoid the objectivist's response.

Explain the Argument from Disagreement