Meta Ethics

Question 1

What are the core beliefs of naturalism

Answer 1

TThere are objective moral truths that can be derived from empirical fact

Question 2

What does cognitivist mean

Answer 2

the view that moral statements are meaningful and can be true or false, much like factual statements.

Question 3

What is moral realism

Answer 3

The idea that moral facts exist independent of the human mind

Question 4

What is F.H.Bradleys approach to ethics

Answer 4

“My Station and its Duties”-book
The goal is a “concrete universal” of self realisation-understanding the individual is part of society and good comes from performing that role e.g. teachers teaching-morality comes from fittting in witth societal roles

Question 5

Does Bradley blieve in tabula rasa

Answer 5

No-people are born with a predisposition towards certain characteristics, inherited from their parents

Question 6

To Bradley, what are ethical statements

Answer 6

Propositions about a persons place in society-proveable true or false
e.g. Policeman catching criminals is good-verifiable

Question 7

What does Bradley say turning against society means

Answer 7

You are turning against yourself

Question 8

Does Bradley agree with the social contract

Answer 8

No-he doesnt believe we are individuals within society, but that society is an organism of itself

Question 9

Does Bradley believe morality is absolute

Answer 9

No, it shifts over time depending on tthe needs and nature of the society-points to evolution as our current morality being the result of thousannds of years of progress

Question 10

What is Hume’s law and how does it relate to naturalism

Answer 10

Hume’s law is the is-ought gap-We cant go from saying something “is” something to what something “ought to be”-there is no logical inference from killing is painful to we ought not to kill
Therefore, we cannot use facts about the world to conclude moral facts from, which is a key part of naturalism

Question 11

What is Moore’s ttautlogical part of the naturalistic fallacy and how does it relate to naturalism

Answer 11

Good cannot be defined because ethical facts are not the same as natural ones. Pleasure or happiness are natural properties, but you cannot infer something is good because it is pleasing.
Although something can be said to be pleasing and good, the two words do not mean the same thing, otherwise it would be tautological.-Pleasure is good, as naturalists might say, does not to them meann pleasure is pleasure.

Question 12

What is Moore’s definitional part of the naturalistic fallacy and how does it relate to naturalism

Answer 12

Good is a simple concept that cannot be defined-similar to the colour yellow., comapred to complex concepts like horses or water that can be described. -only give examples such as this thing is yellow-but that does not tell us what yellow is-similar to ethics-we can call something good but that does not tell us what good is.

Question 13

What is Moore’s open question argument

Answer 13

Questions are either closed-yes or no-or not-require more explanation
Moore says that naturalists cannot give a yes or no answer to a statement regarding good-ergo they cannot define it simply-so it is meaningless as a meta-ethical system as it cannot define good

Question 14

What is intuitionism

Answer 14

Also called ethical non-naturalism-a cognitive system that states there are objective truths that can be known objectively, but not from the world around us.

Question 15

What do intuitionists claim can be determined of all ethical propositions

Answer 15

They can be determined to be true or false immediately-due to intuition-what this means is that a part of the judgement exists independently of human thought as a non-natural, sui generis property

Question 16

What does sui generis mean

Answer 16

Unique

Question 17

What two questions does moore say needs to be answered by moral philosophy, and how does he say intuitionism answers them

Answer 17

What is intriniscally good/valuable-Answered via intuition-no need for proof
What actions ought to be performed-this does not need proof as it is known from the first answer and the understanding of consequences of actions

Question 18

Why does Moore say that disagreement on ethical matters still occur, if everyone knows intuitively the same objectively, correct, universal answer

Answer 18

Because there are uncertainties about the exact question being asked, and if everyone knew the same question and understood it, then they would get the same answer

Question 19

What is G.E. Moores book called

Answer 19

Principa ethica

Question 20

Where does Moore say our idea of good comes from

Answer 20

Innately and intuitively-not via reasoning

Question 21

What two errors does Moore say we should be aware off in intuitionism

Answer 21

Considering something to be good because it leads to something else-something good should be independent and intrinsically good
Considering just one feature that makes something good-e.g. happiness of pleasure

Question 22

What two main goods did moore identify as good purely for their own sake

Answer 22

Human interaction
Aesthetic pleasure

Question 23

What does Moore say we can then do once we know what the intrinsic goods are

Answer 23

use empirical investigation to find out what actionns will lead to the best outcome

Question 24

What is H.A. Prichards article called

Answer 24

Does moral philosophy rest on a mistake

Question 25

What does Pritchard say about our sense of obligation to perform an action

Answer 25

It is underivate-original and immediate-no reasoning is involved

Question 26

What does pritchard say about things we 'ought to do'

Answer 26

No study of how the world is, can result in determining what we ought to do-there is no rational link between action and what ought to be done Proof is redundant because no evidence can ever result in something being objectively good and we ought to always do

Question 27

What is Pritchards "general" thinking

Answer 27

A moral agent ensuring they are aware of the preliminiaries-all the facts about the situation-and the different consequences and results of actions-basically just understanding the scenario and what "is" moneylender example-knowing how much money and to whom etc

Question 28

What is Pritchards "moral" thinking

Answer 28

The recognition of the obligation that arises in the unreflective consciousness-not derived from evidence, but serves to bridge the is-ought gap moneylender example-knowing it is right to repay borrowed money

Question 29

What are the basic challenges to intuitionism

Answer 29

There is no proof it exists Even if we did, there is no proof everyone intuits the same thing-moore intuits good whereas Pritchard intuits a moral duty

Question 30

Are Pritchard and Moore deontological or consequentialist

Answer 30

Pritchard-Deontological Moore-consequentialist

Question 31

What is J.L. Mackies argument from queerness

Answer 31

If intuitionism asserts moral properties are facts, then why can they not be proved-Intuitionism claims a strange type of property exists, but cannot be tested or analysed for. calls the fact that ethical solutions can be made by sitting down and having ethical intuition a "travesty of actual moral thinking"

Question 32

Who are emotivisms main proponents

Answer 32

A.J. Ayer and C.L.Stevensons

Question 33

What is Emotivism

Answer 33

Also called ethical non-cognitivism-the idea that ethical statements are not making factual claims about the world, but rather merely offering the speakers opinion

Question 34

What would emotivists say the phrase "stealing is wrong" is mean to do

Answer 34

Indicate the speakers position on stealing-wrong=bad Try to dissuade people from stealing

Question 35

What is the boo hurrah theory

Answer 35

When people say something is good, they are merely saying they like it when that thing happens, and vice versa

Question 36

Why does Emtoivism conclude that people argue, even if they can agree on facts

Answer 36

Its a matter of subjective values-unique and unverifiable

Question 37

What 4 classes of ethical language does Ayer define

Answer 37

Definitions of ethical terms-meta ethics Moral experience and its cause-psychology, sociology-matters of why rather than should Exhortations-trying to get people to do things-not claims Ethical judgements-Normative statements so unphilosphical-ayer does not go into detail

Question 38

What does Ayer claim about ethical pronouncements

Answer 38

They are neither analytic or syntthetic-Tautological or verifiable-so do not make factual claims

Question 39

Why does Ayer dismiss naturalism and objectivism

Answer 39

Naturalism-e.g. utilitarian-it is easy to say an act that creates the most pleasure is wrong e.g. Omelas Intuitionism-He claims it treats ethical statements as unverifiable propositions-and they are therefore meaningless-no objective validity

Question 40

How does Ayer point out emotivism is different to subjectivism

Answer 40

Subjectivists see ethical statements as non-empirical propositions about how one is feeling-Ayer says that if it was a proposition, it could be proven true or false Subjectivisms main criticism is that good or bad is not determined by feelings-however, emotivism does not claim to make any ethical judgements, and so denies tthat feelings, or anything else, are deciding factors.

Question 41

Who accuses emotivism of being too reductionist by not allowing anyone to call things like genocide or murder wrong

Answer 41

James Rachels-States that murder is wrong has more weight, thought, evidence and feeling behind it than i like this tea

Question 42

Does emotivism regard ethical debate as pointless

Answer 42

Yes in terms of ethics-John rafferty describes ethical edbate as like advertising for different points of view-however may still be useful to societal cohesion, but revolves around manipulating an audience rather than truth

Question 43

Does emotivism reduce the ability for universal agreement

Answer 43

Yes-Stevenson, an emotivist, argues that a statement which alters someones position on an ethical debate can be argued as a reason for or against an ethical proposition. However, this statement can be anything, as long as its convincing e.g. lying, racism etc and so any moral judgement can be made on any, not necessarily a correct, basis, and so universal agreement is unlikely.