Skip to main content

Universalisability and Objectivity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover An Applied Perspective on Indian Ethics
  • 143 Accesses

Abstract

The supposition of objectivity of moral values has been largely strengthened by the requirement of their universalizability. Ethical realism has had an attractive appeal as it carries with it a strong baggage of universalizability. And one thing that irresistibly binds philosophers together – from Greek philosophers to Kant, Hucheson, Hare and Habermas – is the idea that anything ethical must be somehow universal, ‘Act only on that maxim which you can at the same time will that it be a universal law’, said Kant.

This chapter therefore focuses on universalizability vis-à-vis objectivity. Here it is argued that universalizability cannot be always true of moral principles. John Mackie, for example, exposed some subjective elements in universalizability. We thus try to show that universalizability of moral principles cannot promote their (literal) objectivity. Universalizability, we point out, is not the same as universality. And objectivity in the literal sense cannot draw support from universalizability. Moral values and moral principles, therefore, must be objective in a sense compatible with their defeasibility and justified violation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This is the main point made byJohn McDowell in his ‘Non-cognitivism and Rule Following’ in Holtzman and Leich (eds) Wittgenstein : To Follow a Rule, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981.

References

  • Baier, K. (1958). The moral point of view. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dancy, J. (1993). Moral reasons (p. 80). Oxford/Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flew, A. G. N. (1964). Theology and Falsification. In A. G. N. Flew & A. McIntyre (Eds.), Body, mind and death. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare, R. M. (1952). Language of morals (p. 130). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackie, J. L. (1977). Ethics: Inventing right and wrong. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, M. G. (1961). Generalization in ethics. New York: Alfred A Knop.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1993). Practical ethics (3rd ed., p. 11). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mohapatra, P.K. (2019). Universalisability and Objectivity. In: An Applied Perspective on Indian Ethics. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7503-3_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics