No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 January 2010
Ethical objectivists hold that there is one and only one correct system of moral beliefs. From such a standpoint it follows that conflicting basic moral principles cannot both be true and that the only moral principles which are binding on rational human agents are those described by the single true morality. However sincerely they may be held, all other moral principles are incorrect. Objectivism is an influential tradition, covering most of the rationalist and naturalist standpoints which have dominated nineteenth and twentieth century moral philosophy: there is widespread agreement amongst relativists themselves that objectivism is firmly rooted in common sense.
1 I use the term ‘objectivism’ rather than ‘universalism’ since the existence of principles applicable to all rational human agents is consistent with these principles not being recognised by some agents.
2 An exception is Gilbert Harman who holds that relativism is a common- sense view. See Harman, 1975, 1977, 1978a, 1978b.
3 K. Nielsen, for example, lists twelve different interpretations which may be placed on Westermarck's views. See Nielsen (1982) pp. 126.