Skip to content
Coordinates of ThoughtHome of Philosophy
Join

Book corner · Intermediate

Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong

J. L. Mackie · 1977 · Medium (150–350 pages)

3.5 from 2 reviews · 19 views

+ Add to my shelf

Be the first to put it on your shelf.

What it is

Mackie's book opens with the claim that there are no objective values and defends it in the most influential first chapter in modern meta-ethics. Ordinary moral judgements, he argues, do purport to describe objective, action-guiding facts, so the view is an error theory: those judgements are systematically false. He supports it with the argument from relativity, that moral disagreement is better explained by different ways of life than by some people misperceiving objective values, and the argument from queerness, that such values would be metaphysically and epistemically unlike anything else. He also explains why we tend to project our attitudes onto the world. The rest of the book then asks what morality we should construct once this is accepted, discussing universalisability, the function of morality in countering limited sympathies, utilitarianism, rights, and the bearing of religion and determinism on ethics.

Why read it

It states the case for moral scepticism more clearly and forcefully than any other book, which is useful whether you accept it or are trying to answer it.

Where to start

Read the first chapter, 'The Subjectivity of Values', on its own before going any further.

Reviews

  1. Alistair Gow

    Mackie is a sort of Hume with the gloves off, and as a Hume admirer I enjoyed it. The argument from queerness is put so plainly that you either feel its force or you start to see where you would push back. I was less taken with the second half, which builds a morality on the ruins and sometimes feels like a different, duller book.

  2. Henrike Vogel

    I read this as a lifelong reader of Kant, determined to be unconvinced, and was partly unconvinced. The first chapter is excellent and fair; Mackie concedes that ordinary moral language claims objectivity, which many sceptics will not. But I think he underrates the possibility that practical reason itself supplies the authority he finds 'queer'. Three stars for persuasiveness, five for clarity.