Emotivism

Question 1

Background

Answer 1

• Main philosopher = A.J. Ayer - 1936 book ‘Language, Truth, and Logic’
• Acknowledges influence of other philosophers (Russell, Hume)
• Set out to illustrate existing meta-ethical theories were meaningless

Question 2

Intuition is meaningless

Answer 2

• Ayer rejects assertion of innate moral intuition
• Wrong as MAs have different ideas about same moral situation
• Not surprising -> nature of Intuitionism = no way of analysing

Question 3

Naturalism is meaningless

Answer 3

• Rejected, related to belief in theory of Logical Positivism (Vienna Circle)
• Verification Principle -> only analytical (within themselves) and synthetic (verified with EE) truths meaningful
• Naturalism neither so meaningless

Question 4

Meta-ethics is meaningless

Answer 4

• Argued all existing meta-ethical theories were meaningless, ‘pseudo-concepts’
• Ethical language neutral at best -> describes occurring moral actions
• E.g. “that person is bad bc they stole” same as “that person just stole”

Question 5

Explanation of Emotivism

Answer 5

• Ethical language expressions of our emotions
• ‘Hurrah/boo theory’, making moral judgements same as saying ‘hurrah’ or ‘boo’ to something
• E.g. ‘stealing is bad’ -> don’t like stealing, could express as ‘boo to stealing’
• Michael Lacewing “they are simply our feelings of approval and disapproval”

Question 6

Objective

Answer 6

• Ethical language based on emotions, not objective, influenced by preferences, upbringing, opinions
• Does not mean ethics = subjective
• Emotional response to ethical situation = subjective, not necessarily thing expressing emotion to
• No objective ethical language to express

Question 7

Universal

Answer 7

• Not objective so not universal
• Every MA has unique emotions about different ethical propositions

Question 8

Cognitive

Answer 8

• Not cognitive
• Ethical propositions not meaningful, not objective

Question 9

Psychology and Sociology

Answer 9

• Ethical language just reflection of what individual feels about certain action
• Best left to Psych/Sociology
• Could study when individual felt particular way about certain ethical action

Question 10

Religious Language can still be persuasive

Answer 10

• “ethical terms do not serve only to express feelings. They are calculated also to arouse feeling, and so to stimulate action”
• When express emotional feeling, not only expressing own opinion, expressing wish for other to have same emotion about it
• Headmistress “boo to stealing” -> expressing wants all her pupils to have same emotion about stealing

Question 11

C.L Stevenson Background

Answer 11

• Developed theory in 1937 article ‘The Emotive Meaning of Ethical Terms’
• Coined ‘Emotivism’ (prev ‘hurrah-boo theory’)
• Rejected ‘Hurrah-boo’ -> ethical language beyond individual emotional response to moral situations
• Persuasive element

Question 12

Religious Language can be dynamic - S

Answer 12

• Ethical language terms have power to command, express (dis)approval, persuade, arouse sympathy etc
• Referred to as ‘causal property’
• “it produces affective responses in people”
• EL terms more than just expressions of emotions, ignore dynamic element = ignore true meaning

Question 13

Ethical Debate - A

Answer 13

• Ayer’s could render ethical debate meaningless (Ayer = religious language neither analytic nor synthetic)
• Ethical debate just people expressing emotions, no meaningful substance

Question 14

Ethical Debate - S

Answer 14

• Distinguishes between propositions about ‘belief’ and ‘attitude’
• Belief = concerning facts, can be objectively verified (euthanasia illegal in UK)
• Attitude = Subjective emotive use of RL (euthanasia is wrong)
• Could still be meaningful, subjective use of RL often based on objective facts
• Ethical debates based on firm, justifiable beliefs about world, purpose is to share ‘attitude’ based on these ‘beliefs’
• Has substance, based on factual beliefs, not solely attitudes

Question 15

Challenge - No basic ethical principles can be established

Answer 15

• Ayer doesn’t value ethics, believes no basic ethical principle can be established, all EL meaningless
• Jeremy Hayward “One conclusion that can be drawn from Emotivism is that … no rational agreement is possible on ethical matters”
• Ayer -> best left to Psych/Sociology
• Dismissing normative ethics (NL, SE, Util) meaningless, clearly use RL
• Could leave MAs in state of antinomianism -> amoral, anarchy
• Dangerous, seemingly wrong, millions of people follow ethical principles
• Mel Thompson “You cannot reduce morality to a set of cheers and boos”

Question 16

Challenge - Ethical Debate becomes a Pointless Activity

Answer 16

• Ayer does not allow for ethical debate, no grounds for it (2 people expressing emotions with no meaningful substance)
• Seems wrong -> history = ethical debate led to clear decisions made (abolition of slavery, vote for women, homosexuality legal)
• Stevenson’s version accepts

Question 17

Challenge - can be no universal agreement some actions are wrong

Answer 17

• Does not allow ethical absolutes (e.g. murder/rape always wrong)
• Absolutism works on principle of universal ethical belief about certain ethical actions (murder always wrong)
• Emotivism subjective -> rules cannot be applied universally
• Does not allow absolutist agreement on what is wrong
• Against 1947 ‘Human Right Charter of the United Nations’, highlights universals e.g. right to life

Question 18

Strengths

Answer 18

• Subjective nature allows all opinions to be equally valid -> egalitarian
• Resolves argument why ethical disputes never completely resolved (abortion) -> no solution to resolve
• Correct EL meant to be persuasive
• E.g. parents language intended to be reciprocal, hope children will copy -> ‘do not swear’
• Ayer “ethical terms do not serve only to express feeling. They are calculated also to arouse feeling, and so to stimulate action”

Question 19

Hume Quote

Answer 19

“when you pronounce any action … to be vicious, you mean nothing, but that … you have that feeling or sentiment”

Question 20

Intuition Meaningless Ayer Quote

Answer 20

“unless it is possible to provide some criterion by which one may decide between conflicting intuitions … intuition is worthless”