1 00:00:00,960 --> 00:00:05,520 OK. Welcome to the series of mini podcasts, welcome to everyone here. 2 00:00:05,520 --> 00:00:11,160 Thank you for coming and welcome to everyone who's watching or listening on podcasts. 3 00:00:11,160 --> 00:00:18,000 OK, this is the third in the series of common arguments. 4 00:00:18,000 --> 00:00:21,600 This time we're going to look at it's all a matter of opinion. 5 00:00:21,600 --> 00:00:30,420 So sometimes people suggest that morality is a matter of personal opinion, that it's somehow subjective. 6 00:00:30,420 --> 00:00:38,950 So, for example, judging that abortion is wrong is comparable, or so they say to deciding that sardines are tasty. 7 00:00:38,950 --> 00:00:44,520 And so whereas I like sardines, maybe you don't like sardines, 8 00:00:44,520 --> 00:00:50,460 you might say that I find I don't think abortion is morally right and you think abortion is morally wrong. 9 00:00:50,460 --> 00:00:55,320 And that's just like my liking sardines and you're not liking sardines. 10 00:00:55,320 --> 00:00:59,730 And that's the claim that we're going to consider in this podcast. 11 00:00:59,730 --> 00:01:06,690 OK, the idea that morality is just a matter of opinion and statements of personal 12 00:01:06,690 --> 00:01:13,020 preference such as sardines are tasty or red is the most beautiful colour or whatever, 13 00:01:13,020 --> 00:01:19,260 or I like bleu. And I usually thought to have these three characteristics. 14 00:01:19,260 --> 00:01:24,810 Firstly, they're made true or false by some fact about the individual who makes them. 15 00:01:24,810 --> 00:01:29,730 So if I say sardines are tasty, what makes sardines tasty? 16 00:01:29,730 --> 00:01:37,980 True is some fact about me. The fact I like sardines actually is as straightforward as that. 17 00:01:37,980 --> 00:01:43,080 It's also made true or false by some fact about which I'm an authority. 18 00:01:43,080 --> 00:01:51,000 So if I like sardines, I know I like sardines. There's no I don't have to consult you about this. 19 00:01:51,000 --> 00:01:58,260 I don't have to look it up. If if I like sardines, I know I like sardines and I know immediately that I like sardines. 20 00:01:58,260 --> 00:02:04,830 And also I it's usually thought that I can't get that wrong. I can't be wrong about whether I like sardines or not. 21 00:02:04,830 --> 00:02:09,450 If if I believe I like sardines, the chances are that I do like sardines. 22 00:02:09,450 --> 00:02:13,510 This isn't something I can get wrong. 23 00:02:13,510 --> 00:02:23,970 And if we compare moral statements to that sort of list of things, so if we get the statement, it's morally acceptable to rob elderly ladies. 24 00:02:23,970 --> 00:02:28,590 So some believes that it's morally acceptable to rob elderly ladies. 25 00:02:28,590 --> 00:02:33,900 Well, that would have to be made true or false by some fact about some. 26 00:02:33,900 --> 00:02:39,420 So it's morally acceptable to rob elderly ladies. 27 00:02:39,420 --> 00:02:43,080 Well, that's not made true or false by some fact about some. 28 00:02:43,080 --> 00:02:49,950 Is it obviously wrong, some facts perhaps about which some is an authority? 29 00:02:49,950 --> 00:02:55,770 OK, well, why is some an authority about it's being morally acceptable to rob elderly ladies? 30 00:02:55,770 --> 00:03:07,740 Again, no sense that he's an authority. So, again, we put across here and finally the idea, some can't be wrong about its being wrong or sorry, 31 00:03:07,740 --> 00:03:15,450 its being morally acceptable to rob elderly ladies. Well, I think he's obviously wrong, far from being infallible. 32 00:03:15,450 --> 00:03:22,050 So again, we get across there, it really seems to be nonsense. 33 00:03:22,050 --> 00:03:26,820 Moral statements are nothing like statements of personal preference. 34 00:03:26,820 --> 00:03:30,630 So this triggers the question, why do people think this? 35 00:03:30,630 --> 00:03:36,570 Why do people liken moral statements to statements of personal preference? 36 00:03:36,570 --> 00:03:42,210 And what I'm going to offer is, is my understanding of this mistake. 37 00:03:42,210 --> 00:03:48,720 And the explanation lies in the fact that people confuse first-order beliefs, 38 00:03:48,720 --> 00:03:54,210 beliefs about the world with second-order beliefs, beliefs about beliefs. 39 00:03:54,210 --> 00:04:02,910 And I'll explain this in a second. But if you think my belief about that chair's being blue is a first order belief, a belief about the world, 40 00:04:02,910 --> 00:04:08,730 whereas my belief about your belief that that chair is blue is a second-order belief. 41 00:04:08,730 --> 00:04:11,840 It's a belief about a belief. 42 00:04:11,840 --> 00:04:22,130 OK, well, why do I think that people think that moral statements are like statements of personal preference because they make this confusion, OK? 43 00:04:22,130 --> 00:04:28,670 Well, this statement is is ambiguous. Robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable for some. 44 00:04:28,670 --> 00:04:34,790 There are two different ways we might interpret that. Here are the two interpretations. 45 00:04:34,790 --> 00:04:39,800 We might think that Sam believes that robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable. 46 00:04:39,800 --> 00:04:46,310 So robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable for some might believe that nothing more than that. 47 00:04:46,310 --> 00:04:51,980 Sam believes that mugging elderly ladies is morally acceptable or we might 48 00:04:51,980 --> 00:04:59,150 understand it to be morally mugging elderly ladies is morally acceptable for some. 49 00:04:59,150 --> 00:05:09,950 And let's look at these in turn. So if we we have reason to believe that Sam believes that robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable, 50 00:05:09,950 --> 00:05:16,280 whenever someone gives us reason to believe that he believes robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable. 51 00:05:16,280 --> 00:05:21,140 So let's say Sam says, well, of course, mugging elderly ladies is OK. 52 00:05:21,140 --> 00:05:25,640 You know, where you get the idea it isn't. I've always thought this is OK. 53 00:05:25,640 --> 00:05:34,250 Or maybe he just goes out and drops elderly lady. So it's by his actions that we get the impression that he believes it's OK. 54 00:05:34,250 --> 00:05:38,180 And it's just an unfortunate fact about the way some human beings are brought 55 00:05:38,180 --> 00:05:46,010 up that they do form that sort of belief that it's OK to rob elderly ladies. 56 00:05:46,010 --> 00:05:53,000 And but we've got reason to believe that robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable for some. 57 00:05:53,000 --> 00:06:00,050 Only when we have reason to believe that it is morally acceptable for some, even if not for anyone else. 58 00:06:00,050 --> 00:06:06,440 Not for you, not for you, not for me, but OK for some to rob elderly ladies. 59 00:06:06,440 --> 00:06:14,090 And where is it was very easy to imagine a situation in which some might believe that it's OK to rob elderly ladies. 60 00:06:14,090 --> 00:06:19,160 It's very difficult indeed to imagine a situation in which we would have reason 61 00:06:19,160 --> 00:06:25,430 to believe that it is morally acceptable for some to rob elderly ladies. 62 00:06:25,430 --> 00:06:33,140 And if we believe that some actually was sorry, it was morally acceptable for some to rob elderly ladies, 63 00:06:33,140 --> 00:06:39,530 we'd have no reason to interfere with his robbing an elderly lady would have no reason to stop him. 64 00:06:39,530 --> 00:06:46,400 It's almost inconceivable that we think it's OK for some to rob elderly ladies. 65 00:06:46,400 --> 00:06:53,960 So let's go back to that. OK, robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable for some is ambiguous. 66 00:06:53,960 --> 00:07:03,740 And there are the two interpretations. So the first one is what Sam believes, that robbing elderly ladies, we've said that, yes, 67 00:07:03,740 --> 00:07:08,540 he may may believe that, but if he does, something has gone wrong with his upbringing. 68 00:07:08,540 --> 00:07:12,350 But that one robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable. 69 00:07:12,350 --> 00:07:14,840 Sam is out of the question. 70 00:07:14,840 --> 00:07:29,060 But if you confuse those two, if you understand that sentence as being that rather than that, you might think that that is as unexceptionable as that. 71 00:07:29,060 --> 00:07:35,550 And that's the confusion that I think you're causing. 72 00:07:35,550 --> 00:07:40,040 So let's have a look at this. Mike believes that Marianne's wearing green. 73 00:07:40,040 --> 00:07:49,490 Marianne is wearing green, as a matter of fact. OK. Notice there's one sentence here embedded within another sentence. 74 00:07:49,490 --> 00:07:58,670 OK, so there's the embedding sentence, which is the whole thing and the embedded sentence, which is just Marijan is wearing green. 75 00:07:58,670 --> 00:08:06,110 OK. Now each of these because their sentences admits of both truth and falsehood. 76 00:08:06,110 --> 00:08:12,930 Tell me, could that sentence be true? And yet that sentence false. 77 00:08:12,930 --> 00:08:21,490 So could it be true that Mike believes that Marianne's wearing green and yet false that Marion's wearing green? 78 00:08:21,490 --> 00:08:34,810 Could be Mike is colour-blind. OK, could it be true that Marianne is wearing green and yet full that Mike believes that Marianne's wearing green? 79 00:08:34,810 --> 00:08:40,870 That is different from the one I had before, I hope. Could it be? 80 00:08:40,870 --> 00:08:48,670 Yes, could be again. OK, and what about could it be? 81 00:08:48,670 --> 00:08:52,480 Now hang on, I've got. That's true. That's false. 82 00:08:52,480 --> 00:08:56,650 Could that be true and that true? The embedding sentence true. 83 00:08:56,650 --> 00:09:02,530 And the embedded sentence true. Yeah. And could they both be false? 84 00:09:02,530 --> 00:09:15,400 OK, the moral of this story is that the truth value of the embedded sentence and the embedding sentence vary completely independently, 85 00:09:15,400 --> 00:09:24,490 and this isn't surprising. The reason it isn't surprising is the sort of thing that makes that sentence true is a fact about me, isn't it? 86 00:09:24,490 --> 00:09:31,620 Me and what I'm wearing. What sort of facts makes that sentence true? 87 00:09:31,620 --> 00:09:35,190 A fact about Mike and what he believes, isn't it? 88 00:09:35,190 --> 00:09:44,450 So the fact that makes the embedding sentence true is a quite different fact from the fact that makes the embedded sentence true. 89 00:09:44,450 --> 00:09:54,350 And that's exactly the same when it comes to moral statements, so consider some believes that robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable. 90 00:09:54,350 --> 00:10:02,660 Here we've got so the embedding sentences in green and the embedded sentence is in red. 91 00:10:02,660 --> 00:10:09,710 Now, put the embedded sentence be true with the embedding sentence false. 92 00:10:09,710 --> 00:10:16,760 Yep, could they both be true, could they both be false, could whichever is the other way around? 93 00:10:16,760 --> 00:10:26,720 OK, once again, the truth values of these two sentences, the embedding sentence in the embedded sentence, values vary completely independently. 94 00:10:26,720 --> 00:10:32,840 And again, what this shows us is that the fact that it makes that sentence true, 95 00:10:32,840 --> 00:10:38,480 which is a fact about Sam and his beliefs, is completely independent from the facts. 96 00:10:38,480 --> 00:10:45,680 That makes the embedded sentence true, which is a fact about robbing elderly ladies and whether it's morally acceptable. 97 00:10:45,680 --> 00:10:55,160 So we might ask ourselves, what sort of fact does make it true or false that robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable? 98 00:10:55,160 --> 00:11:08,290 Well. Uh oh, okay, sorry, just the new the embedding sentence, some believes that robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable, 99 00:11:08,290 --> 00:11:12,790 is made true by a fact about Sam and the embedded sentence. 100 00:11:12,790 --> 00:11:24,670 Robbing elderly ladies is morally acceptable, is made true by a fact about robbing elderly ladies, and some may be an authority about his own beliefs. 101 00:11:24,670 --> 00:11:34,450 OK, so he may if he believes that mugging elderly ladies is OK, we're prepared to say that OK, this is a fact about which he may be an authority, 102 00:11:34,450 --> 00:11:44,430 but there's no reason to think that he's an authority on the embedded sentence, is there, just because he's an authority on the embedding sentence. 103 00:11:44,430 --> 00:11:49,740 And to the extent that we think he's an authority on whether or not he has a certain belief, 104 00:11:49,740 --> 00:11:54,330 we might actually think that his beliefs about his own beliefs are infallible. 105 00:11:54,330 --> 00:11:59,010 But that doesn't mean his beliefs are infallible. 106 00:11:59,010 --> 00:12:08,550 In other words, his beliefs about the moral acceptability of robbing elderly ladies, that's not only not infallible, it's false. 107 00:12:08,550 --> 00:12:13,260 So it's simply not the case that a belief to the effect that robbing elderly 108 00:12:13,260 --> 00:12:18,750 ladies is morally acceptable is made true by facts about a given individual, 109 00:12:18,750 --> 00:12:24,450 far less about the individual effect on which he has authority. 110 00:12:24,450 --> 00:12:28,260 And if you listen to the podcasts about ethical theories, 111 00:12:28,260 --> 00:12:33,660 you'll know that there are actually many ideas about what makes a moral belief true or false. 112 00:12:33,660 --> 00:12:39,420 So if we say, OK, mugging elderly ladies is morally acceptable, is it or is it not? 113 00:12:39,420 --> 00:12:52,220 Well, if we're utilitarians, what sort of fact would make it true that mocking elderly ladies is not morally acceptable? 114 00:12:52,220 --> 00:13:00,240 What do we say about this? We would say something about it's not leading to the greatest happiness, 115 00:13:00,240 --> 00:13:05,300 the greatest number wouldn't be so a utilitarian would think that muskeg elderly ladies 116 00:13:05,300 --> 00:13:09,440 is morally acceptable if it produces the greatest happiness of the greatest number. 117 00:13:09,440 --> 00:13:16,130 And it's not the case that mugging elderly ladies is morally acceptable if it doesn't produce the greatest happiness of the greatest number. 118 00:13:16,130 --> 00:13:23,960 So the sort of fact that makes a moral statement true will be a fact about the greatest happiness of the greatest number. 119 00:13:23,960 --> 00:13:32,150 So again, we move away completely from the idea that that moral truths are personal preferences, 120 00:13:32,150 --> 00:13:42,200 that they're facts about individuals and that they're facts about individuals, about which individuals are infallible. 121 00:13:42,200 --> 00:13:51,290 So I think we should reject the claim quite categorically, reject the claim that morality is a matter of personal opinion. 122 00:13:51,290 --> 00:13:57,090 And it isn't surprising. Morality matters to us much more than personal preference. 123 00:13:57,090 --> 00:14:00,900 I mean, whether you like sardines or not is is something I mean, 124 00:14:00,900 --> 00:14:08,150 it really it's not terribly relevant to me unless you're coming to tea with me and I'm thinking of serving you sardines on toast or something. 125 00:14:08,150 --> 00:14:15,170 But whether you like kindness or honesty actually matters to me a great deal. 126 00:14:15,170 --> 00:14:19,400 And there's a very good reason for morality's mattering much more. 127 00:14:19,400 --> 00:14:25,820 And I can only lie successfully to you if you believe me. 128 00:14:25,820 --> 00:14:30,410 The truth and lying is parasitic upon truth telling. 129 00:14:30,410 --> 00:14:38,780 And so I want you to tell the truth. The only way we can communicate, in fact, is if I if we most of us tell the truth most of the time. 130 00:14:38,780 --> 00:14:47,330 If I ask you about what's on at the local cinema, for example, and you're able to tell me, then I've saved myself time and energy. 131 00:14:47,330 --> 00:14:54,170 But if I then think, well, hang on a second, why should I believe him? I've actually wasted my time and energy, haven't I? 132 00:14:54,170 --> 00:15:00,620 So it matters to me a great deal that most of the time most people tell the truth. 133 00:15:00,620 --> 00:15:05,600 And actually it matters to liars that most people most of the time tell the 134 00:15:05,600 --> 00:15:11,960 truth because you can't lie to somebody unless they're going to believe you. 135 00:15:11,960 --> 00:15:15,770 So we do and should argue about morality. 136 00:15:15,770 --> 00:15:24,680 Morality is not a matter of personal preference.