4.1 Meta-Ethics Flashcards

1
Q

what is meta-ethics

A

meta-ethics analyses the reasoning behind ethical language and moral terms such as ‘good’ and ‘right’

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

two main views of meta-ethics: cognitivism

A
  • moral truths exist independently of our mind, moral judgments can be true or false
  • terms such as ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ correspond to facts in the world
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

two main views of meta-ethics: non-cognitivism

A
  • there is no such thing as moral truth within the world
  • what we call moral facts are just subjective moral responses
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

realism

A

moral truths exist independently of human opinion (objective morality)

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

anti-realism

A

moral truths do not exist independently and instead bases on human attitidues, emotions, agreements

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

how does ethical naturalism support cognitivism?

A
  • treats moral statements as objectively true or false based on empirical facts
  • so, it aligns with a cognitivist approach to moral language
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

what is ethical naturalism?

A

ethical naturalism argues that moral statements are factual and can be verified using empirical evidence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

ethical naturalism - strengths

A
  • accounts for moral feelings when we feel outraged by clear injustice
  • moral statements are meaningful; unlike emotivism, treats moral claims as factual
  • compatible with science; aligns with scientific teachings about human behaviour and well-being
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

ethical naturalism - weaknesses

A
  • the naturalistic fallacy (g.e moor): terms like “good” cannot be defined in terms of ethical properties (eg pleasure)
  • the is-ought problem (hume): you cannot logically derive moral oglibations from factual statements
  • moral disagreements persist: if morality was based on objective, natural facts, we could expect less disagreement within ethics
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what is emotivism?

A

moral statements are not statements but expressions/indicators of emotional states

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

how did a.j ayer positivism influence emotivism?

A
  • as it argues that only statements verified by emprical evidence/logial reasoning are meaningful
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what is the ‘boo-hurrah’ theory?

A
  • ayer’s idea that moral statements simply express approval or disapproval
  • eg) stealing is wrong = boo to stealin g
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

what is prescriptivism?

A
  • the belief that moral statements prescribe actions rather than simply express emotions
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

who developed prescriptivism?

A

r.m hare

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

how is prescriptivism different to emotivism?

A
  • prescriptivism sees moral language as action-guiding, where emotivism sees it as emotional expression
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

strengths of emotivism

A
  • promotes tolerance of different viewpoints
  • supported by verification principle
  • explains moral disagreement
17
Q

emotivism weaknesses

A
  • reduces morality to subjective feelings
  • cannot resolve moral disagreements
  • undermines moral progress
18
Q

A.J Ayer Emotivism

A
  • as moral statements are neither logical nor provable by the senses, so are factually meaningless
  • emotional statements instead show emotional states/feelings, merely convey an approving/disapproving tone
19
Q

intuitionalism

A
  • moral truths are indefinable and self-evident, we know ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ can’t be discovered - instead they are self evident
  • like naturalism, its a moral realist and cognitivist theory
20
Q

G.E Moore - Intuitionalism

A
  • we don’t recognise through empirical facts: the ‘good’ is self-evident to our intuition
  • good is a ‘simple concept’ which we ‘just know’ intuitively
  • eg) wouldn’t know how to describe colour yellow, we just know
21
Q

normative ethics

A

first-order ethical questions about how we should behave, and ethical norms

22
Q

applied ethics

A

applying normative principles and arguments to particular areas, eg medical ethics

23
Q

naturalistic fallacy

A

criticism of naturalism that we cannot assume that just because something is natural doesn’t mean its good

24
Q

moral realism (discovery)

A

belief that right and wrong objectively exist independently from the mind, they are real properties known via observation

25
Q

St Thomas Aquinas

A
  • NML is an example of theological naturalism
  • the world has a God-given order built into it
  • moral values can be worked out though understanding our God-given purpose and observing natural order
26
Q

Jeremy Bentham

A
  • Utilitarian thinkers like Bentham and John Stuart Mill believed humans can discover right/wrong through discovering actions lead to pleasure/pain
27
Q

moral anti-realism (decide)

A
  • right and wrong do not objectively exist independently from the mind
  • different anti-realist theories disagree how we should understand moral language
    eg) whether it attempts to make claims about objective properties
28
Q

strengths of naturalism

A
  • makes morality objective
  • fits with widely used normative theories
  • accounts for moral disagreements
29
Q

weaknesses of naturalism

A
  • hume is-ought distinction (not able to empirically the rightness/wrongness of an action)
  • ge moore naturalistic fallacy (natural doesn’t mean good)
  • overlooks human subjectivity (naturalism often reduces human behaviour is biological/environmental determinism)