Meta-Ethics Flashcards
Define meta-ethics.
Looks into the language of ethics and uses it to ask how seriously we should take ethical approaches. (meta = out/beyond)
What are the main questions of meta-ethics?
1) What does the word “good” mean and how do we know?
2) What is the purpose of moral statements?
3) Does objective moral truth exist?
Provide examples of moral terms and moral statements and objective moral truth.
- Moral terms: good, bad, right, should, ought
- Moral statements: murder is wrong
- Objective moral truth: murder is actually wrong
What is the difference between cognitivism and non-cognitivism? [Purpose of Moral Statements]
- Cognitivism: moral statements contain facts, so are true or false (e.g., “murder is wrong”) [propositions]
- Non-cognitivism: moral statements contain no facts, so are neither true nor false [doesn’t have meaning]
Define emotivism
The theory that the purpose of moral statements is to express emotion (not communicate facts) [“boo-hurrah” theory]
Provide some strengths for cognitivism.
- What sounds like a proposition probably is!
- Emotivism in discourse is due to search for facts or truth
- Uses arguments for objectivism - if there are facts, the statements communicate them
Provide some strengths for non-cognitivism.
- Moderate emotivism allows for more than just emotion in statements (e.g., anti-Holocaust statements are more than feelings, they express emotion)
- Avoids need to define “good”
- Moral discourse is often emotional!
- Verificationism
Provide some weaknesses for non-cognitivism.
- Verification principle itself is meaningless
- Not all statements are necessarily emotional
- Doesn’t make sense if you replace terms (do what is “hurrah” instead of “good)
- Simplest method doesn’t always lead to truth
- You cannot criticise any action (homophobia + racism)
What is the difference between objectivism/absolutism and relativism/subjectivism? [Moral Truth]
- Objectivism: there is an independent, objective moral truth and moral statements describe these [i.e. everything is absolute]
- Subjectivism: there is no objective moral truth
- Relativism: moral truths depend upon culture, time, place, etc, that is never ABSOLUTE
Provide some supporting claims for objectivism and absiolutism.
- Plato and cave allegory ~ dualism (truth exists in realm of forms(
- Allows criticism of immorality
- Kant’s categorical imperative + NML
- UN ~ accessible for everyone (right to education)
- Global laws prohibiting murder, theft
- Ross ~ prima facie duties that are obvious
Provide some supporting claims for relativism and subjectivism.
- Sheer variety of moral views
- Moral views change
- Logical positivism ~ no empirical evidence, supports materialist view of the world)
- Fletcher’s situation ethics
Provide some views against relativism and subjectivism.
- Cannot criticise other’s views
- James Rachels ~ relativist make tolerance as an absolute rule
What is the difference between naturalism and non-naturalism? [what is good and how do we know?]
- Naturalism: the word “good” is a moral term, can only be defined in non-moral for “natural” terms
- Non-naturalism: the word “good” cannot be defined, but known in another way
Provide some supporting claims for naturalism.
- Bentham’s utilitarianism
- Fletcher’s situation ethics
- Aquinas’ natural moral law
Provide some supporting claims for non-naturalism.
- Moore ~ not fallacy, it is an open question instead
- Hume ~ Is-Ought, Hume’s fork and fact value distinction
- Ross ~ intuitionism
