Moral skeptics challenge whether sound moral reasoning is possible. An extreme form of moral skepticism is called ethical subjectivism: Moral judgments merely express feelings and attitudes, not beliefs that can be justified or unjustified by appeal to moral reasons. The most famous version of ethical subjectivism is called emotivism: Moral statements are merely used to express emotions-to emote-and to try to influence other people behavior, but they are not supportable by valid moral reasons.", What would ethical relativists say about ethical subjectivism? What should be said in reply to the ethical subjectivist?
Using an example, such as moral reasoning in designing aluminum cans (Petroski) or in designing a portable seat for infants (Whitbeck), discuss how moral reasons can be objective (justified) even though they sometimes allow room for different applications to particular situations.