Intro to Phil: Skepticism

Moral Skepticism

Basics

Explanation

Moral skepticism is the view that we cannot have certain or reliable knowledge of moral truths. It questions whether objective moral facts exist at all, or whether humans can truly know them if they do.

Truth Testing

Explanation

Truth testing is the process of evaluating whether a statement or belief is true. Moral skeptics argue that moral claims cannot be empirically tested or logically proven the way scientific or mathematical claims can. For example, we can’t observe “murder is wrong” in the same way we observe gravity or 2+2=4.

Skep Justifications

Theory of Relativity

Different cultures hold radically different moral beliefs, and there is no objective way to say one culture’s morals are better than another’s. Because morality changes depending on time, place, and culture, skeptics argue that there are no universal moral truths. If morality were objective, we would expect more consistency across cultures.

Argument from Queerness

If objective moral values existed, they would be unlike anything else in the universe, and this “queerness” makes it unlikely that such moral facts exist. Skeptics argue it’s more reasonable to believe moral values are human inventions, not objective features of reality.

Regress

Any moral claim requires a justification, but that justification also needs support, and so on, leading to an infinite regress. Since we can't ground moral beliefs in a foundational truth without eventually begging the question or appealing to subjective values, moral knowledge is unreliable.

External World Skep

Just as we can’t be absolutely sure the external world exists (think: Descartes’ evil demon), we can’t be certain moral truths exist either. If we’re skeptical about physical reality without proof, we should be even more skeptical about abstract moral truths, which have no sensory evidence.