1D: Meta-ethics: Naturalism

Question 1

What is naturalism?

Answer 1

there are objective moral properties of which we have empirical knowledge, but these properties are reducible to entirely non ethical or natural properties (ie needs, wants or pleasures)

Question 2

What does naturalism claim?

Answer 2

Gods will defines morality (evident in the natural world, primary and secondary precepts)

Question 3

Example of a theological naturalist

Answer 3

Aquinas

Question 4

Example of a hedonic naturalist

Answer 4

JS Mill

Question 5

How does hedonic naturalism define good and bad?

Answer 5

Good = what produces pleasure
Bad = what produces pain

Question 6

What does it mean to say that ethical facts are not subjective?

Answer 6

They aren’t views/opinions but based on empirical evidence

Question 7

What does it mean to say that ethical facts are cognitivist?

Answer 7

Knowable - describe a world as objectively true or false

Question 8

What are non-cognitivist statements?

Answer 8

Express feelings and cannot be checked for truth.

Question 9

What is the difference between verification and falsification?

Answer 9

Verification = we have the means to verify
Falsification = we have the means to check the falsivity

Question 10

Name of Bradley’s book

Answer 10

‘Ethical Studies’ (1876)

Question 11

According to Bradley, when is morality achieved?

Answer 11

Pursuing self realisation and adopt values of community

Question 12

According to naturalism, how do we discover truth?

Answer 12

through our sense perceptions: hear, smell, touch, taste and logic

Question 13

What do ethical naturalists believe?

Answer 13

The verifiability/falsifiability of moral statements is linked to the observation of the natural features of moral actions

Question 14

Three categories of ethical naturalists

Answer 14

1. Theological naturalists: goodness linked to the will of God as seen in nature
2. Hedonistic naturalists: goodness is a fact of pleasure or happiness
3. Teleological naturalists: goodness linked to the proper goal of humankind - eudaimonia

Question 15

Non-ethical elements for each type of ethical naturalist

Answer 15

1. Hedonists = pleasure
2. Theological = God’s will
3. Virtue = what causes human suffering

Question 16

How are moral terms understood by ethical naturalists?

Answer 16

By analysis the natural world: since moral laws are objective, they can be observed in the same way that scientific terms are

Question 17

Who was FH Bradley?

Answer 17

• 19th century philosopher
• part of British Idealist movement (belief in the Absolute: being itself or the being that transcends all other beings)

Question 18

Who was Bradley influenced by?

Answer 18

Georg Hegel (a German philosopher)

Question 19

How did Bradley say our moral perspective is determined?

Answer 19

by observing our position in society

Question 20

Why did Bradley reject hedonism?

Answer 20

Because it does not help us reach a level of self understanding

Question 21

What did Bradley decide was the best approach to naturalism?

Answer 21

• Pursuing self realisation within the community
• Our place and role within the community provide a satisfying life
• We have to observe our families/wider communities and adopt their values
• This puts us firmly in the concrete universe and offers the best satisfaction

Question 22

What does Bradley say we need to do to become a good person?

Answer 22

Know our station and fulfil the duties of that station

Question 23

Challenge: Hume’s Law (Hume’s guillotine)

Answer 23

• written in ‘A Treatise of Human Nature’
• based on the fact that philosophers come to moral conclusions without reasoning
• statements made by ethical naturalists are unreasonable
• you cannot derive an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’ : what IS the case and what OUGHT to be the case are quite different
• you cannot get from a positive factual statement to a prescriptive statement without having an extra step in the middle that isn’t included in the statement
• what we morally ought to do is based on sentiment
• knowledge of facts together with appropriate attitudes prompts action: knowledge of facts alone does not

Question 24

Challenge: The Naturalist Fallacy (George Moore)

Answer 24

• written in ‘Principia Ethica’
• it is a mistake to try and define the concept of ‘good’ in terms of a natural property
• defining ‘good’ as anything other than itself is to commit the ‘naturalistic fallacy’
• good is “simple, indefinable and unanalysable”

Question 25

Challenge: Open Question Argument (Moore)

Answer 25

• written in ‘Principia Ethica’
• statements like “it is good to give to charity” rest on further clarification: “because it is charitable”
• this means they are not closed questions
• goodness was a simple property that cannot be defined using other terms