Naturalism Flashcards

(15 cards)

1
Q

Ethical Naturalism

A
  • Morality and what is right/wrong can be found in natural world around us
  • Ethical statements are factual + cognitive, meaning they are objective, therefore meaningful
  • Morality cannot be established by anything outside our senses i.e. supernatural authority (God -> DCT)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Explanation of Naturalism

A
  • Both ethical + non-ethical statements are of equal value, can be verified by empirical evidence -> factual, cognitive, meaningful
  • ‘My car is white’ - use senses to verify truth
  • ‘Hitler was a bad man’ - built concentration camps, death of 6M Jews, gas chambers etc
  • 1st non-ethical statement, no EL associated, factual proposition
  • 2nd factual, verified using EE
  • Illustrates ethical propositions cognitive (meaningful as can be verified with EE)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Ethical Naturalism in practice

A
  • EL established from experiences’ of world (kindness ‘good, cruelty ‘bad’ from past experiences)
  • Kindness verified good (happiness), cruelty verified bad (brings pain)
  • Can verify experiences, ethical descriptions universal
  • Can make universal cognitive statements (murder is bad), can verify -> become ethical truths
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Link to Utilitarianism

A
  • Mill (Rule) relies on previous experiences to assess moral rules to apply today
  • Deontological rules based on what actions create max amounts of happiness/pleasure
  • Supports idea people should put interests of group before their own, also supported by naturalism
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

F.H. Bradley Background

A
  • Wrote version of ethical naturalism in 1876 book ‘Ethical Studies’
  • Chapter 5 ‘My Station and its Duties’ addresses naturalism
  • Not directly naturalist theory, based on naturalist principles
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Bradley Theory Background

A
  • Interested in understanding meaning of human existence
  • Rejected Bentham’s Act Util -> not enough emphasis on individual
  • Rejected Kant’s theory (should always follow duty) -> not enough on community
  • Bradley’s theory takes ideal middle ground
  • Polemical of theory (Hegelian tradition), accepted evolution may mean some sense of inherited ethics
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Empirical Study of our Community

A
  • Meaning of human existence = self realisation we are individual within a community
  • “To know what a man is you must not take him in isolation” - Bradley
  • Ethics about developing ‘self’ in context of community in which you live
  • “Yes, we have found ourselves, when we have found our station and its duties, our function as an organ of the social organism” - Bradley
  • Realise true self through empirical study, adopt values of community
  • Satisfy ‘self’ by fulfilling ideal role in society indicated by empirical observations
  • Erase self-isolation, become true selves + functioning, useful member of community
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Ethical Language

A
  • All ethical action should be about self-realisation
  • Naturalism supports:
    1- Knowledge can only be gained through empirical study of world
    2 - Follow ethics of community
  • “Morality exists around us” - Bradley, only part of natural world, EO
    3 - “To be a ‘good’ person, we must know our station and its duties, once your position in life is decided, you have to perform the functions of that station”
  • ‘Good’ purely based on verifying statements with EO
    4 - Found station in community -> follow ethics of that role
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Challenge - David Hume’s Law (is-ought problem)

A
  • Critical ethical propositions could be verified by EE -> just a value judgement
  • ‘Hitler is bad’ = value judgement of EE
  • VJ disqualifies EPs from being facts
  • Logically absurd to move from ‘what is’ (fact) to ‘what ought’ (VJ)
  • Cannot move from ‘John was murdered’ to ‘you ought not to murder’
  • Completely different types of proposition, one cannot lead to the other
  • Naturalism wrong -> EPs lack meaning
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

George E. Moore

A
  • Argued against naturalism in 1903 book ‘Principia Ethics’
  • Proposed ‘Naturalistic Fallacy’ and ‘Open Question’ arguments
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Moore - Naturalistic Fallacy

A
  • EL terms (‘good’ ‘bad’) indefinable, not complex
  • Can’t be reduced to empirically studied definitions, already in simplest form
  • Example -> yellow indefinable, impossible to describe as not complex, cannot break down further to create definition
  • Same applies to EL terms
  • ‘Good is just good’ in the same way that ‘yellow if just yellow’
  • EPs cannot be verified with EE, EL cannot be empirically defined
  • “I am asked “‘what is good?’ my answer is that good is good, and that is the end of the matter
  • Can only know ethical terms through intuition
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Moore - Open Question Argument

A
  • EL terms cannot be used as factual statements, cannot define empirically
  • Any attempt of empirical definition reduces idea of it
  • E.g. ‘bad = cruel’ limits meaning of bad to cruel, means more, can mean a cheat etc
  • EL terms examples of open ended questions (cannot be defined in simple, straight-forward way)
  • Colour of wall = closed question, answered empirically
  • ‘What is good?’ = open question, cannot be answered in straight-forward empirical way
  • Moore -> ethical naturalists assume EL terms closed questions
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Strength - Universal

A
  • Ethical propositions are objective so morality is universal
  • Gives more importance than just being matter of human opinion
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Strength - Scientific

A
  • Allows ethical claims to be tested in scientific way
  • Gives morality strong foundation -> importance
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Strength - Absolutist

A
  • Gives morality set of absolute universal propositions, e.g. murder is wrong
  • Matches some principles of normative ethics (NL, Rule Util)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly