Subjective Morality?

[DLJ]

A bloke walks into a garage and asks the repairman "How does a car work?"

The salesperson comes over and tells the bloke that he can buy one of four cars...

...
The error theorists facts are hypothetical.  We don't know what they are, but we know that we don't have them.
...

So, I'm being asked to buy a car that doesn't exist?  Seems odd.

Let's see what some random page has to say:

---

Error Theory
Error theory is a cognitivist form of moral nihilism. It is the view that ethical statements can be propositions, but that all ethical propositions are false (or cannot be true) — that we are generally in error when we make any moral statement.

There are generally two forms of error theory, which depend on the semantic reason for our error in making ethical statements.

Global falsity holds that all ethical statements are false propositions.

Presupposition failure alternatively holds that the statements are not explicitly false, but are certainly not true because the statements themselves make false presuppositions about morality (namely, that morality exists). Similarly one may state that “the aliens on the moon have purple hats”, which is logically a proposition but suffers from a presupposition failure, by assuming that there are aliens on the moon, which is false¹. On some accounts, this presents the statement from being false.

---

Ah, OK.  This seems like the fourth Catuṣkoṭi i.e. not (P or not P)

Sounds OK but it's about (non-)existence, or rather "at which information layers does something qualify as real?"

...
The subjectivists facts are variable.  They are facts about peoples perceptions or states of belief.  Facts about their opinions and minds.  They may even be intersubjective facts.
-This culture has a strong taboo against waving with their left hand.  They think it causes lethal bad juju.  They think this because.... [insert -long winded observations of cultural development and it's historical context and/or explanation of the relevant areas of the mind that might cause this common belief as an artifact of biology- here]  
...

So, I'm being asked to buy this car on the basis of tradition?  Seems odder.

'Tradition' is an input to 'organisational ethics' and thus an indirect influencer on individual behaviour so I can see how a moral-event might be processed but I'm no closer to understanding whether 'moral facts' are a thing.

...
The non naturalists facts are mind independent and non-natural.  They can be empirically known but not physically shown because they are not facts about anything...meaningfully speaking...physical or amenable to scientific investigation.  
-These facts are the facts of what's been called "the sensible world", and are those things that we can experience and assess by pure reason.  
...

This seems to again relate to which information layers are deemed to be real or natural.  

This must the super-natural car.  I don't think I'll buy that.

Is reasoning involved in the moral-event process?  Not initially.  Initially, it's all about auto-response.  Reasoning is required when considering the cause.

...
The  cornell realists facts are those mind independent facts of some matter or act x that substantiate themselves in the natural world.  They are facts about what we contend to be able to know empirically and are capable of providing both physical evidence and a convincing demonstration of.
-We can establish by scientific process that some act x causes pain or harm by a variety of mind independent metrics.  If causing pain or harm is wrong, this act objectively does that, and so is wrong.  
...

So, this must be the conditional branching (the if/then) car.   If I want everyone to think I'm an arrogant prick then my car turns into a BMW.



It was nice chatting to the salesperson and thanks for the offer of BMW-club membership but I still need to talk to the mechanic to find out what a moral fact actually might be.