Question 1

Those who accept cultural relativism argue that adhering to a culture-independent moral code
A) leads to moral skepticism.
B) makes moral disagreement merely apparent.
C) encourages judgmental arrogance that leads to intolerance.
D) All of the above

Accepted Answer

The answer of Those who accept cultural relativism argue that...

Question 2

Jeske argues that practices such as slavery and lynching show that
A) cultural relativism is true.
B) toleration should not be extended to all cultural practices.
C) moral skepticism is unjustified.
D) cultural relativism encourages toleration.

Accepted Answer

Jeske argues that some cultural practices should not be tolerated, specifically those that violate fundamental human rights and lead to harm and suffering, such as slavery and lynching. This goes against the idea of absolute cultural relativism, which states that all cultural practices are equally valid and should be accepted without judgement. Instead, Jeske advocates for a more nuanced approach to cultural tolerance, which takes into account the impact of cultural practices on individuals and society as a whole.

Question 3

Jeske argues that in cases of extreme moral disagreement
A) there is usually common ground.
B) the disagreement is usually more apparent than real.
C) resolving the disagreement is always impossible.
D) there is no fact of the matter about who is right and who is wrong.

Accepted Answer

There is usually common ground in cases of extreme moral disagreement because people often share similar values and goals, even if they disagree about the best way to achieve them.

Question 4

Which of the following statements is consistent with cultural relativism with speaker-relativity?
A) "That's right for them even though it's not right for us."
B) "It is certainly wrong for me to own slaves, but it was not wrong for Thomas Jefferson to own slaves."
C) "What's right for the members of my culture is right for everyone."
D) None of the above

Accepted Answer

The answer of Which of the following statements is consistent...

Question 5

According to Jeske's analysis, our reluctance to judge people in other places and times is best explained by
A) cultural relativism with agent-relativity.
B) our recognition that what people are justified in believing is largely a function of their time and culture.
C) cultural relativism with speaker-relativity.
D) our embrace moral skepticism.

Accepted Answer

Jeske argues that our reluctance to judge people in other places and times is best explained by recognizing that what people are justified in believing is largely a function of their time and culture. This is referred to as cultural relativism. However, Jeske also adds the concept of agent-relativity, which highlights that judgments about people's beliefs and actions should take into account their personal circumstances and the available information at the time.

Question 6

Jeske argues that moral judgments ought to be sensitive to the culture of the agent being evaluated because
A) cultural relativism with agent-relativity is true.
B) we must avoid smug, judgmental arrogance.
C) cultural relativism with speaker-relativity is true.
D) culture is relevant to what it is rational for that agent to believe.

Accepted Answer

Jeske argues that when evaluating an agent's moral judgments, culture is relevant because it affects what it is rational for that agent to believe. In other words, cultural context can influence an agent's moral reasoning and judgment, and it is important to take that into account when evaluating their actions. Cultural relativism with agent-relativity (A) and speaker-relativity (C) do not accurately capture Jeske's argument. While avoiding judgmental arrogance (B) may be a good general principle, it is not directly related to the argument being made.

Question 7

How does Jeske explain our reluctance to judge other cultures? Is her explanation more convincing than that of the relativist in your view? Why or why not?

Accepted Answer

The answer of How does Jeske explain our reluctance to...

Question 8

Jeske claims that rejecting cultural relativism does not entail intolerance and that accepting cultural relativism is actually incompatible with tolerance under certain circumstances. How does Jeske argue for these claims? Are her arguments convincing? Why or why not?

Accepted Answer

The answer of Jeske claims that rejecting cultural relativism does...

Question 9

In the final section of her essay, Jeske suggests that there is less moral disagreement across time and place than it initially appears. What is the basis for Jeske's suggestion? Do you find her suggestion plausible? Why or why not?

Accepted Answer

The answer of In the final section of her essay,...

Question 10

Mackie's claim that values are not objective is meant to include which of the following?
A) Moral value
B) Rightness and wrongness
C) Duty and obligation
D) All of the above

Accepted Answer

Mackie argues that all values - including moral values, conceptions of rightness and wrongness, and duties and obligations - lack objective foundations. Therefore, the correct choice is D, as it encompasses all of these values.

Question 11

An error theory is a theory
A) that contains an error.
B) that maintains that all judgments of a certain kind are false.
C) about what errors are.
D) about how to best avoid errors.

Accepted Answer

An error theory maintains that all judgments of a certain kind are false, typically due to some fundamental error or problem with the way we think about or approach a certain type of issue. Therefore, option B is the correct choice.

Question 12

According to Mackie, what is the difference between scientific disagreement and moral disagreement?
A) There is less disagreement about science than there is about morality.
B) Scientific disagreement results from speculative inferences or inadequate evidence while moral disagreement does not.
C) Most scientific disagreement gets resolved while most moral disagreement does not.
D) All of the above

Accepted Answer

According to Mackie, scientific disagreements can be resolved by gathering more evidence or revising theories, while moral disagreements cannot be resolved in the same way because they are based on subjective values and beliefs. Therefore, the difference between scientific and moral disagreement lies in the nature of the disagreements themselves.

Question 13

Mackie maintains that the mere occurrence of disagreement shows that
A) there are no objective values.
B) there are no objective truths.
C) moral judgments are purely conventional.
D) None of the above

Accepted Answer

Mackie argues that disagreement alone does not prove the absence of objective values or truths; rather, he uses it as part of a broader argument against objective moral values.

Question 14

According to Mackie, what best explains variations in moral codes?
A) That they reflect ways of life
B) That they express perceptions of objective values
C) That moral judgments lack descriptive meaning
D) All of the above

Accepted Answer

Mackie argues that variations in moral codes can best be explained by the fact that they reflect different ways of life and cultural practices. He believes that there are no objective moral values or truths, and that moral judgments lack descriptive content.

Question 15

According to Mackie, if there were objective values, they would have to have which of the following features?
A) They would have to be utterly different from anything else in the universe.
B) We could be aware of them only via some special faculty of moral perception or intuition.
C) Both a and b
D) Neither a nor b

Accepted Answer

According to Mackie, objective values would have to be utterly different from anything else in the universe and we could only be aware of them through some special faculty of moral perception or intuition.

Question 16

Mackie argues that all moral thinking requires input from
A) ethical intuition.
B) emotion.
C) reason.
D) delusion.

Accepted Answer

Mackie argues that all moral thinking requires input from ethical intuition because he believes that moral judgments are not based on objective facts, but rather on subjective feelings and beliefs.

Question 17

According to Mackie, what is the moral objectivist's best move in response to the argument
From queerness?
A) To evade the issue
B) To look for companions in guilt
C) To insist that objective values are not queer
D) None of the above

Accepted Answer

Mackie argues that the moral objectivist's best move in response to the argument from queerness is to look for companions in guilt - to acknowledge that there are other forms of objective properties (such as mathematical or logical properties) that similarly "outrun" naturalistic explanations and yet are still accepted as objective. This move allows the moral objectivist to avoid the charge of queerness while still maintaining the objectivity of moral values.

Question 18

According to Mackie, moral judgments
A) are false.
B) lack descriptive meaning.
C) should be treated as expressions of desires.
D) All of the above

Accepted Answer

Mackie argues that moral judgments claim to be objective but cannot be universally true, leading him to conclude that they are false, a position known as moral skepticism or error theory.

Question 19

Which of the following moral claims does Mackie think is true?
A) It is morally good to help a deserving person in need.
B) It is morally wrong to inflict needless suffering for fun.
C) You are morally obliged to do what is best for yourself.
D) None of the above

Accepted Answer

Mackie argues for moral skepticism, suggesting that objective moral values do not exist. Therefore, he would not affirm any of these claims as true in the objective sense.

Question 20

Do you think Mackie succeeds in showing that all moral claims are false? If yes, explain what you think is the best objection to his arguments and why you think it fails to refute Mackie's conclusion. If no, explain why Mackie's arguments fail to establish his conclusion.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Do you think Mackie succeeds in showing...

Quiz 3: Skepticism About Morality

Those who accept cultural relativism argue that adhering to a culture-independent moral code

Jeske argues that practices such as slavery and lynching show that

Jeske argues that in cases of extreme moral disagreement

Which of the following statements is consistent with cultural relativism with speaker-relativity?

According to Jeske's analysis, our reluctance to judge people in other places and times is best explained by

Jeske argues that moral judgments ought to be sensitive to the culture of the agent being evaluated because

How does Jeske explain our reluctance to judge other cultures? Is her explanation more convincing than that of the relativist in your view? Why or why not?

Jeske claims that rejecting cultural relativism does not entail intolerance and that accepting cultural relativism is actually incompatible with tolerance under certain circumstances. How does Jeske argue for these claims? Are her arguments convincing? Why or why not?

In the final section of her essay, Jeske suggests that there is less moral disagreement across time and place than it initially appears. What is the basis for Jeske's suggestion? Do you find her suggestion plausible? Why or why not?

Mackie's claim that values are not objective is meant to include which of the following?

An error theory is a theory

According to Mackie, what is the difference between scientific disagreement and moral disagreement?

Mackie maintains that the mere occurrence of disagreement shows that

According to Mackie, what best explains variations in moral codes?

According to Mackie, if there were objective values, they would have to have which of the following features?

Mackie argues that all moral thinking requires input from

According to Mackie, what is the moral objectivist's best move in response to the argument From queerness?

According to Mackie, moral judgments

Which of the following moral claims does Mackie think is true?

Do you think Mackie succeeds in showing that all moral claims are false? If yes, explain what you think is the best objection to his arguments and why you think it fails to refute Mackie's conclusion. If no, explain why Mackie's arguments fail to establish his conclusion.