Non-cognitivism - Emotivism

Question 1

What is emotivism ?

Answer 1

Moral judgements express (non-cognitive) feelings of approval/disapproval.

When someone says (murder is wrong)
They mean (Boo! Murder!)

When someone (gives money to charity)
They mean (Hooray! Giving money to charity!)

None of these actions can be true/false they are just expressions of approval/disapproval
(Not a belief - emotivism = non-cognitivist)

Question 2

Hume - Treatise of Human nature

Answer 2

Arguments for view - moral judgements are not judgements of reasons (Not cognitive)

Question 3

1. Moral judgements motivate action

Answer 3

Judgements of reason (belief grass=green)
Dont motivate us to act in any way
It is emotions/desires that motivate us to act
(My desire to drink beer will motivate me to find some beer)

(My belief that murder=wrong) will motivate me to not murder.
(My belief that giving money to charity=good) Will motivate me to donate money to charity.

P1-Moral judgements can motivate action
P2- Judgements of reason cannot motivate actions
C1-Therefore - moral judgements are not judgements of reasons
(They are non-cognitive)

Question 4

2. Hume’s fork - Applied to moral judgements

Answer 4

Two kinds of judgements of reason - Relation of idea/Matters of fact.

P1-Moral judgements are not relations of ideas - (We can conceive of murder is wrong as either true/false).
P2- Not matters of fact (we cant observe/empirically verify that its wrong).
C1- Therefore moral judgements are not judgements of reason
-(Are Non-cognitive).

Question 5

3. Is/ought argument

Answer 5

Moral (Ought statements) are a diff kind of thing to factual (if statements)

(Is) = Factual claims about the case. - That is torture
(Ought) = You ought not to torture people

You cannot logically derive ought statements (ought not to torture)
From statements about what is - (this is an act of torture)

Why ? - One type is non-cognitive while the other is cognitive.
Is = true/false = Cognitive
Ought = Expressions of emotion not true/false = Non cognitivism

Naturalism argues that moral properties can be defined in terms of natural. But it does not explain how these natural properties can logically lead to moral conclusions

Question 6

Verification principle - Ayer

Answer 6

A statement only has meaning if,
it is an analytic truth (2+2=4)
It is empirically verifiable (knowledge via experience) (Grass=green)
A statement that does not fit these descriptions = meaningless

P1- Moral judgements fail the verification principle
P2- Murder is wrong is not an analytic truth or empirically verifiable

P3 -We can prove murder causes pain but it is not the same as proving it is wrong.
P4- We can empirically verify that murder causes pain but can not empirically verify that murder is wrong.

Naturalism - Fails
C1- Moral judgements (murder is wrong) - are not analytic truths or empirically verifiable.
C2- Therefore they are meaningless
C3- Moral judgements express feelings of approval/disapproval