(philosophy)
Pojman describes two arguments for moral objectivism. What are these arguments and how do
they differ?

Answer:

Moral Objectivism holds that there are objective, universal moral principles that are valid for all people. Louis Pojman proposes one such moral principle that he believes is binding upon all human beings: “It is morally wrong to torture people just for the fun of it.”

Explanation:

The Diversity Thesis, which holds that morals vary from culture to culture, and The Dependency Thesis, which has that the weight of what is considered "good" and "wrong" depends on an action approved by society, are Pojman's two main objections to moral objectivism.

According to moral objectivism, objective, universal moral standards apply to everyone. One such moral rule that Louis Pojman suggests is binding on all humans is that "it is morally unacceptable to torture people only for enjoyment."

Pojman uses this particular idea as an illustration since it is one that most people automatically accept. It is challenging to claim that this principle does not apply equally to all people and civilizations. And it is sufficient to show that moral objectivism is accurate for there to be even one of these principles.

For more information about Pojman objectivism refer to the link:

https://brainly.com/question/6199685

#SPJ2

In the 1700s, the National Convention ended the nonarchy and make Frace What?

The Piedmont region is labeled
on the map.

The mountains region is labeled
on the map.

The area labeled C is known as the
.

The easternmost area on the map is known as the
.