Naturlaism And G.E Moore Flashcards
(10 cards)
What is ethical naturalism?
-Ethical Naturalism is the view that moral values are real and can be identified through natural properties like pleasure, happiness, or purpose — making moral statements factual and open to observation or reason.
-It is a cognitive theory, meaning moral claims like “murder is wrong” can be true or false and understood in the same way we understand facts about the world
What are examples of ethical naturalism?
-Utilitarianism
-Natural Moral Law
-Situation Ethics
-Virtue Ethics
Who was G.E Moore?
G. E. Moore (George Edward Moore) was a 20th-century British philosopher, best known for his work in ethics and analytic philosophy
What is the Naturalistic Fallacy according to G. E. Moore?
-Moore argues that it is a mistake to define ‘good’ using natural properties, like pleasure, health, or reproduction. This is known as the Naturalistic Fallacy
-For example, saying “Goodness = reproduction” (as Natural Moral Law might) is flawed, because reproduction is a descriptive natural fact, while “good” is a non-natural moral quality. The two are not the same kind of thing
-Moore claims Ethical Naturalism commits the Naturalistic Fallacy by equating moral terms with factual, observable things. He insists you cannot say something is good just because it occurs in nature or benefits people.He believes this misunderstands the meaning of “good”, which cannot be broken down or defined in natural terms like “pleasure” or “happiness”
What does Moore say about the meaning of ‘good’?
-Moore argues that “good” is a simple, indefinable property — you can’t explain it by comparing it to anything elseHe famously says: “Good is good, and that is the end of the matter.”
-For Moore, goodness is self-evident: we recognise it through moral intuition, not observation or reason
-Just as we can’t define the colour yellow, we can’t define “good” — we just know it when we see it
What is intuitionism?
-Moral Intuitionism, as proposed by G. E. Moore, is the theory that moral truths such as “good” or “right” are objective but self-evident
-This means they are not invented by society or feelings, but also cannot be proven through facts or reasoning
-Instead, we know them through intuition – a kind of moral awareness that doesn’t require further evidence
What is Moore’s open question argument?
-Moore’s Open Question Argument is central to defending intuitionism
-He argued that if someone says “Good means pleasure” (as utilitarians do), it is still perfectly reasonable to ask, “But is pleasure really good?”
-The fact that this question makes sense shows that “good” and “pleasure” are not identical – unlike, say, “a bachelor is an unmarried man,” which is a closed question because the definition is built in. Moore uses this to show that no natural property can define ‘good’, because the term always leaves room for further questioning
-Therefore, “good” cannot be reduced to pleasure, happiness, or any observable quality
-Instead, we recognise goodness as a basic, indefinable property through moral intuition. This supports his rejection of Ethical Naturalism and underlines his belief that moral terms are unique, non-natural concepts rather than scientific facts
What was G.E Moore’s yellow analogy?
-Moore uses the analogy of the colour yellow to explain why “good” is a simple and indefinable property.
-Just as we cannot define yellow by breaking it down into smaller parts or comparing it to other colours — we simply recognise it when we see it — Moore argues that “good” is similarly grasped through moral intuition, not defined through observation or logic
-For him, “good” is a non-natural quality: it exists objectively, but it cannot be identified with any factual property such as pleasure, health, or desire
-Trying to define good in natural terms, such as “good is what produces happiness,” fails to capture what “good” really is — it merely describes one thing that might be good
-Moore sees this as a category mistake, confusing a moral concept with a natural fact, and committing what he famously calls the Naturalistic Fallacy
What was G.E Moore’s horse analogy?
-Moore uses the horse comparison to argue that defining good as a natural thing is a logical mistake. He says that claiming “good = happiness” or “good = reproduction” is like saying “a horse = a four-legged animal”
-While it may describe a property of a horse, it doesn’t tell us what a horse is in its essence
-In the same way, saying good equals a natural property fails to define good itself. It commits the Naturalistic Fallacy by mistaking a description for a definition
-This shows that naturalistic ethics oversimplify moral language and ignore the unique nature of ethical terms
How could you argue that naturalism is still a strong theoretical approach?
-naturalism is more useful because it connects morality to facts we can all observe
-Aquinas believed that moral law is written into human nature and accessible through reason. His statement that “good is to be done and pursued, and evil avoided” underpins Natural Moral Law, which defines moral action as fulfilling human purpose
-Similarly, naturalist theories like utilitarianism judge actions based on harm or wellbeing — offering measurable, public standards. Critics of non-naturalism argue that intuition is unreliable and subjective
-People disagree over moral issues like euthanasia or war, and non-naturalism offers no shared standard to resolve such debates. Naturalism, by contrast, appears clearer and more applicable in law, medicine, and policy
