moral anti realism Flashcards

1
Q

what is the difference between cognitivism and non cognitivism

A
  • cognitivism = claim that moral lang. expresses truth apt prepositions, aims to describe the world so can be true or false depending on how well it can describe it
  • NC = opposite of C, instead expresses other, non-prepositional mental states such as emotion or a command
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

what is the difference between moral realism and anti realism

A
  • moral realism = moral properties/truths/facts exist MID
  • MAR = don’t exist MID so either MD or don’t exist at all
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what objections to moral realism come under the anti realist error theory by Mackie

A
  • queerness
  • relativity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

what objections to MR come under the anti realist emotivism theory by Ayer
-v,h

A
  • verification principle
  • humes fork
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

what objections to MR come under the anti realist prescriptivism theory by Hare
afm,iog

A
  • argument from motivation
  • is ought gap
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what does Mackie’s error theory say about ethical language
C OR NC?

A
  • cognitivist
  • ML = cognitivist so can be true or false but moral properties = anti realism perspective
  • so moral lang. aims to describe the world but fails
  • so all moral lang. is false
  • when we use moral lang. we make an error and project our opinion into reality as if it is an objective truth
  • Mackie thinks his arguments from relativity and queerness demonstrate that moral properties do not exist MID
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

what would error theory claim about the statement “stealing is morally permissible”

A
  • the person is trying to claim that stealing is objectively good
  • the claim is false since a property of goodness in stealing does not exist MIDly
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what is the conclusion if error theory is applied to statements about
- mythology
- religion
- mind

A
  • those creatures don’t exist and all statements about them are false
  • God doesn’t exist so all statements about God are false
  • Mind doesn’t exist so all statements about it are false
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

what does Ayers emotivism claim about ethical lang
- C OR NC

A
  • VP = moral lang. is meaningless —> not truth apt
  • instead it expresses some other mental state
  • emotivism = this mental state is one of the sentiments of approval or disapproval
  • boo, hurrah theory
  • NC
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what would emotivism claim about the statement “stealing is morally permissible”

A
  • expression of approval to stealing
  • hurrah for stealing
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

emotivism means all moral views are either entirely subjective or trivial expressions of emotions. what does this mean

A
  • reduces moral views to preferences
  • so it is impossible to have meaningful disagreements
  • does not properly account for what we mean when we use moral language
  • when we say “genocide is bad” this is stronger than “boo to genocide” this is actually an objective claim
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what does prescriptivism claim about moral language
- C OR NC

A
  • non cognitivist
  • ML = meaningless according to VP so is not truth apt so does not express prepositional statements
  • instead expresses some mental state
  • prescriptivism = a command not to do x
  • commands = universal, how everyone should act
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

what would prescriptivism say about “stealing is morally permissible”

A
  • “you should steal”
  • claim that stealing is morally prescribed
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

how can the idea of universalising moral standards resolve the issue of subjectivity faced by prescriptivism?

A
  • provides us with a way of criticising some moral views which is a problem for emotivism
  • even if someone is inconsistent with their views/hypocritical we cannot say they’re correct/incorrect but can call them consistent/inconsistent
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

how can the idea of universalising moral standards be an issue for prescriptivism

A
  • someone could hold abhorrent moral views and this would be fine provided they were consistent in their views
  • would make them praiseworthy according to Hare
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

for error theory, if moral anti realists are correct, can we disagree about morality

A
  • yes
  • we can disagree about our claims but everyone will be wrong about them
17
Q

for emotivism if moral anti-realists are correct can we disagree about morality

A
  • no
  • moral disagreements have no substance
  • should be expressions of approval/disapproval
18
Q

for prescriptivism, if moral anti-realists are correct, can we disagree about morality?

A
  • partially
  • we should try to be consistent with our moral commands so that we criticise others who are inconsistent
  • however, two people with opposing but consistent views will have no way to meaningfully disagree
19
Q

for error theory, if moral anti-realists are correct, can we persuade others about moral claims?

A
  • yes
  • we can persuade others that our claims are the true claims however we would all be wrong about such claims
20
Q

for emotivism, if moral anti-realists are correct, can we persuade others about moral claims?

A
  • yes
  • persuasion is the only use of moral language as it appeals to our sentiments with expressions of approval/disapproval
  • we are appealing to peoples emotions when we express our feelings through moral language in the hope that they may be persuaded to have the same sentiments
21
Q

for prescriptivism, if moral anti-realists are correct, can we persuade others about moral claims?

A
  • yes
  • to say something is right to wrong is to provide a recommendation on how to act
  • moral language aims to influence the behaviour of others and therefore persuades them
22
Q

how does moral anti-realism lead to moral nihilism
what do each of the 3 theories think of it

A
  • MAR = either moral truths are MD or do not exist
  • since they do not exist (MIDly) then this leads to moral nihilism
  • error theory accepts it
  • the other two claim moral language still has meaning but not in a truth apt sense. since they cannot demonstrate any objective sense of morality, they seem to lead to moral nihilism
23
Q

what is moral nihilism

A
  • the rejection of meaningfulness (truth) of claims
  • existential
  • no moral truths and all moral lang. is meaningless
24
Q

how might existentialism provide a way to defend anti-realism from the negative aspects of moral nihilism

A
  • existentialism is a response to nihilism
  • just because there are no moral truths does not mean we have no reason not to be moral
  • so we should choose for ourselves the way we want to live our lives which leads to a positive outcome
25
Q

what is moral progress?
have we made moral progress?

A
  • overtime we are becoming morally better, does mean we have a perfect society, just that we are getting better
  • yes and no
26
Q

can moral anti realism account for the possibility of moral progress

A
  • no
  • since there are no moral truths, there is not one set of moral beliefs being more correct than another
  • so if we don’t know which one is right then none of them are
  • all we can say is that moral beliefs in society change