Ethical Language

Question 1

A) Essay Outline

Answer 1

• Definition of good
• Making moral conclusions
• Meaning of language

Question 2

A) Paragraph 1

Answer 2

Definition of good
•Ethical naturalists, realist and objective
•Morality can not be reduced to ‘good’
•Good is only definable when linked to another property eg/ happiness, Utilitarianism
•”Naturalists differ as to what good, evil etc. are to be reduced to, and how this reduction is to be carried out” Pigden
•Non-naturalists, good can’t be defined in non-moral terms eg/ duty, Deontology
•”A simple idea: cannot be broken down into simpler ideas” Moore

Question 3

A) Paragraph 2

Answer 3

Making moral conclusions
•Hume, Enlightenment empiricist
•Hume’s Guillotine: One cannot get an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’
•Moore’s version is Naturalistic Fallacy
•’Ought’ “expresses some new relation or affirmation to observe” (Hume) to be explained separately
•It is “altogether inconceivable” (Hume) to get a conclusion from an unrelated set of premises
•”The conclusions of a valid inference are contained within the premises” Pigden

Question 4

A) Paragraph 3

Answer 4

Meaning of language
•Ayer's VP
•Hume's Fork
•Makes all ethical language meaningless
•Can't talk of morality, good, or sources of either

Question 5

B) Essay outline

Answer 5

• Intuitionism
• Emotivism
• Prescriptivism
• Conclusion

Question 6

B) Paragraph 1

Answer 6

Intuitionism
•Moore likens good to yellow, “[we] can recognise it whenever it is seen, but we cannot actually define it”
•Hume’s Guillotine is not needed as we intuitively know what we ‘ought’ to do using the guidance of Prichard and Ross
•It lacks authoritative foundation, what about the “ethically colour-blind”

Question 7

B) Paragraph 2

Answer 7

Emotivism
•Work of Stevenson and Ayer
•Ethical language not entirely meaningless, yah-boo theory
•VP defines itself as meaningless
•Foot shows emotions are based on beliefs which are subject to change, so open to rational challenge unlike what Ayer says

Question 8

B) Paragraph 3

Answer 8

Prescriptivism
•Hare gives no moral objective right or wrong, universalising moral principles
•Warnock’s Entropy Principle of Social Relations shows our limits e.g. knowledge, showing we need structure to prevent chaos (classically outlined by Hobbes)
•Risk morally bad maxims eg/ genocide

Question 9

B) Conclusion

Answer 9

• Link to question

* “Reason…ought to be the slave of the passions” Hume