1.5 Non-cognitivism: Prescriptivism Flashcards
What are philosophers’ views on prescriptivism?
Richard M. Hare: ‘Moral statements are more than an expression of personal values or emotions. They don’t just express ideas and outline behaviour’
Why is ethical language most closely linked with prescriptivism?
ethical language is intrinsically prescriptive & implies what ought to be done: this is universal
Why is prescriptivism universal?
everyone in the same position would be advised to take the same approach or course of action
How does prescriptivism support our moral compass?
moral statements command behaviour & guide actions because they prescribe attitudes
What are prescriptive statements comparable to & why?
prescriptive statements are like imperatives that are orders & requests to be followed
Briefly explain prescriptivism
- this type of ethics is concerned with rules, guidelines & norms about what is right & how people should live
- prescriptivists prescribe, i.e. tell us how we ought to behave; they may go further & come up with issues concerning the definite, though not always identical, conclusions
- these prescriptions tell people how they should behave; they do not merely describe how they do behave
- this type of ethics was considered an important part of ethics until the 1930s when it became relatively neglected
Fully explain R.M. Hare’s (1919-2002) influence on prescriptivism
- in his view moral judgements were both prescriptive & universal, & the only coherent way to behave morally was to act on judgements that you’re prepared to universalise
- contrary to Hare, other philosophers argued differently: A.J. Ayer (British emotivist) argued that moral statements don’t describe anything factual & C.L. Stevenson (American emotivist) had maintained that moral statements expressed attitudes founded on individual beliefs, & that they attempt to persuade people to agree with us; Hare, of course, believed that moral statements did more than describe behaviour or express attitudes
- Hare argued that moral statements had a prescriptive quality because they commanded behaviour, guiding our actions: moral statements are to guide choices - our own & other peoples e.g. saying abortion is wrong is attempting to prescribe an attitude & behaviour; the point of prescribing to come round to said person’s thinking & reflect the way in which said person is acting
What are R.M. Hare’s beliefs on prescriptivism?
- he believed ethical statements are prescriptive which means they express our will or wishes; they do not state facts & are not true or false
- however, he argues that when we use the word ‘good’ we do so in relation to a set of standards; for example: ‘A good chair is one that supports your back, is comfortable and fit for the purpose.’
- the word good has a descriptive meaning: if we use the word ‘good’ in a moral sense we are again using a set of standards that apply to that person or object which we commend; this means that the word ‘good’ also has a prescriptive meaning; this happens to any words that commend & describe e.g. ‘steal’ & ‘murder’
What are R.M. Hare’s comparisons of prescriptivism?
- Hare is stating there is a difference between the descriptive meaning & prescriptive meaning & when we use words with an ethical meaning we use them prescriptively i.e. ‘stealing is wrong’ actually means ‘you ought not to steal and neither will I’
- Prescriptivism holds that in order to achieve consistency in moral judgements when we say someone ought to do something, we ought to as well
What are Hare’s beliefs on universalisability?
- as opposed to emotivists, Hare believed that reason had a role to play in moral statements & that moral statements had a universal character about them: for example, saying something is red is to commit to the view that anything which is like that in colour will likewise, be red; the judgement that a thing is red is descriptive i.e. it describes, but it’s simultaneously universal i.e. it applies to everything similar; in this way, moral judgement has the same universal quality too
- Hare believed that the essence of universalisability could be best found in the writings of the NT, as well as the writing of Kant: for instance, one of the NT’s ‘golden rules’ are to do “unto others as you would have done unto yourself” & additionally, Kant wrote that humans should act “only on the maxim (saying) through which you can and at the same time will that it should become a universal law.”
How did Hare argue in support of universalisability?
when making moral statements, there are are qualities about those statements which, when found elsewhere, mean in those situations that the same rule applies: Hare argued that moral statements had a universal quality, & that it is in humans’ best interest to prescribe the advice to others, as we would want to have such advice given to ourselves; it would be inconsistent to do otherwise e.g. if ‘x’ prefers to care for a sick person than go to the pub, this implies that were ‘x’ to be sick then they would wish someone to care for them in similar circumstances
State the fundamental qualities of Hare’s universalisability
- ethical statements are expression of opinion
- ethical statements are universal
- ethical statements facilitate two linked actions: to express our views, while prescribing them to others
