That’s a good question. I don’t think the existence of various theories presupposes that, since some of the theories could be wrong (or some might be better than others). Also, we could come up with additional theories that are obviously wrong, such as: Anti-utilitarianism, where the greatest acts are those that commit the greatest amount of harm and suffering. Anti-utilitarianism is clearly wrong, and if we can say that some principles are wrong, whereas others are right (or at least better than others), then we are still being consistent with moral objectivism.
The two examples quoted are of very dangerous consequences. People will justify their actions by quoting these examples. You should not form a concept based on isolated incidents. You can't robe A to distribute it to many. It is like asking don't save but share your savings with poor people. They save the hard earned money for their future . E
add a third track with no-one tied to it then divert the train
May I ask, does the existence of various theories presuppose that morality is subjective?
That’s a good question. I don’t think the existence of various theories presupposes that, since some of the theories could be wrong (or some might be better than others). Also, we could come up with additional theories that are obviously wrong, such as: Anti-utilitarianism, where the greatest acts are those that commit the greatest amount of harm and suffering. Anti-utilitarianism is clearly wrong, and if we can say that some principles are wrong, whereas others are right (or at least better than others), then we are still being consistent with moral objectivism.
The two examples quoted are of very dangerous consequences. People will justify their actions by quoting these examples. You should not form a concept based on isolated incidents. You can't robe A to distribute it to many. It is like asking don't save but share your savings with poor people. They save the hard earned money for their future .
E