Error Theory (not finished)

Question 1

Atheist argument against theological voluntarism

Answer 1

1. If theological voluntarism is to be viable, then there must be a law-giving God
2. There is no law-giving God
   Therefore 3. Theological voluntarism is not viable

Question 2

Anscombe’s argument against law-conceptions of ethics

Answer 2

1. If a law-conception of ethics is to be viable, then there must be a law-giving God
2. There is no law-giving God
   Therefore 3. A law-conception of ethics is not viable

Question 3

Without a law-giving God…

Answer 3

Theological voluntarism looks unviable

Question 4

The error theory

Answer 4

All moral assertions are false/empty/without justification

Question 5

What are the three positions on moral assertions?

Answer 5

The moral dogmatist, the moral sceptic, the moral nihilist

Question 6

The moral dogmatist

Answer 6

One who believes we can know whether moral claims are true and believes they are true

Question 7

The moral sceptic

Answer 7

One who believes we cannot know whether moral claims are true

Question 8

The moral nihilist

Answer 8

One who believes we can know whether moral claims are true and believes they are false

Question 9

Moral nihilists say that nothing is actually…

Answer 9

Good/bad/permissible/impermissible

Question 10

Moral realists say that certain things are…

Answer 10

Good/bad or certain acts/states of affairs can have certain moral properties

Question 11

Is moral nihilism similar to non-cognitivism?

Answer 11

Yes, they also hold that nothing is good/bad/permissible/impermissible but for the non-cognitivist this doesn’t mean that moral assertions are empty

Question 12

What are nihilists and non-cognitivists?

Answer 12

Anti-realists

Question 13

What do nihilists and non-cognitivists believe?

Answer 13

That it is not true that certain acts/states of affairs can have certain moral properties

Question 14

What is a nihilist best described as?

Answer 14

An error theorist

Question 15

Error theorist

Answer 15

Moral discourse has the aim of securing truth but, it systematically fails to do so

Question 16

How does Mackie aim to show that we have been making an error by looking at something objectively prescriptive to justify moral judgements?

Answer 16

The argument from relativity and the argument from queerness

Question 17

The argument from relativity premise 1

Answer 17

1) There is an enormous amount of variation in moral views, and that moral disagreements often seem unusually intractable. (some cultures have inferior epistemic access than others)

Question 18

The argument from relativity premise 2

Answer 18

2) The best explanation of such phenomena is that all moral judgments ‘reflect adherence to and participation in different ways of life’

Question 19

The argument from relativity premise 3

Answer 19

3) If all moral judgements only reflect adherence to and participation in different ways of life, then although moral judgments implicitly claim, among other things, to be pointing to something objectively prescriptive, these claims are all false.

Question 20

Conclusion of the argument from relativity

Answer 20

Although moral judgments implicitly claim, among other things, to be pointing to
something objectively prescriptive, these claims are all false. (Error theory)

Question 21

The argument from queerness premise 1

Answer 21

1) If a theory necessarily posits ‘queer’ properties - ‘qualities or relations of a very strange sort, utterly different from anything else in the universe’ – we have good reason to believe it is false.

Question 22

The argument from queerness premise 2

Answer 22

2) The thesis that moral judgments point to something objectively
prescriptive necessarily posits queer properties.

Question 23

Conclusion of the argument from queerness

Answer 23

Although moral judgments implicitly claim, among other things, to be pointing to something objectively prescriptive, these claims are all false.
(Error theory)

Question 24

Would supporting the error theory cause an existential crisis?

Answer 24

No, it would cause an emotional reaction but not the abandonment of wanting anything

Question 25

Is supporting the error theory evil?

Answer 25

No, it does not imply anything about the actions one should perform, just that they will not believe in the actions are morally desirable

Question 26

What does the error theory imply?

Answer 26

That you eliminate your practical kinds of justification, no longer refrain from doing something simply because you believe it is morally forbidden

Question 27

What does error theory leave the possibility of?

Answer 27

That there may be other reasons that you should or shouldn’t do something