Ethical Thought 2 Flashcards
What is ethical naturalism?
Use of natural science and empirical evidence to define morality
According to ethical naturalists, are moral facts objective?
Yes - objective moral facts exist and are knowable through empirical methods
Do ethical naturalists believe moral language is cognitive?
Yes - moral statements can be measured by some kind of independent standard
What is Moral Realism?
Moral facts exist and are objective, independent of the human mind
What does the objectivity of moral language according to Ethical Naturalism allow for?
Creation of absolutist principle
What does Bradley argue is the goal of moral behaviour?
Self realisation
What is self realisation?
Coming to an understanding of the individual as part of a societal whole
What is F.H. Bradley’s work and when was it written?
- Ethical Studies
- 1876
What is Bradley’s ‘concrete universal’?
A universal goal with a fixed imperative
What does Bradley believe ethical statements express?
Propositions about each person’s integral place in society as inseparable from the communities in which they live
What does Bradley state morality is?
Behaving in accordance with the moral tradition of the community
How is Bradley’s conclusion of morality verifiable?
Using empirical observance of humans as intrinsically part of communities
How does Bradley refer to evolutionary principles?
Moral laws have evolved alongside society, if it were unrelated to previous events it would be meaningless
In what work does Hume criticise Naturalism?
Treatise of Human Nature (1739)
How does Hume’s Law challenge Naturalism?
It is illegitimate for a conclusion (ought) to be derived solely from a fact (is)
What is Hume’s Law also known as? (2)
- Is-Ought Gap
- Hume’s Guillotine
How did G.E. Moore challenge Naturalism?
Naturalistic Fallacy
What is Naturalistic Fallacy?
Good cannot be defined because ethical facts are not the same as natural ones - pleasant does not equal good
What does Moore argue about good?
It cannot be defined with reference to natural properties
What is Moore’s Open Question Argument?
Defining good by natural properties raises more questions that it answers
Ethics is shaped by society - Bradley
‘a man’s life in its moral duties is in the main filled up by his station in that system of which the state is’
Naturalistic Fallacy - Moore
‘but if he confuses ‘good’, which is not in the same sense a natural object, with any whatever, then there is a reason for calling that a naturalistic fallacy’
Good as indefinable - Moore
‘or is I am asked ‘how is good to be defined?’ my answer is that it cannot be defined’
What is Intuitionism?
Moral language and ethical understanding is formed by knowledge and intuition
What does Intuitionism argue about objectivity?
Moral truths can be objectively know to be true or false through intuition, therefore some part of ethical judgment must exist independently of human beings
How does Intuitionism define intuition?
An immediate apprehension or understanding of self-evident propositions which cannot be proved
How do ‘obvious truths’ differ from ‘self-evident propositions’?
- ‘obvious truths’ are relative
- ‘self-evident propositions’ prove themselves and are objective
How is intuition not infallible?
It is equally possible to cognise a false preposition as it is a true one
How can an agent of Intuitionism understand a moral duty?
They must understand the situation fully before intuition guides them
What does Moore argue are 2 potential errors in judgement for intuitionism?
- Considering something to be good because it is instrumental in achieving something else
- Assuming there is just one feature that makes something good
If something is intrinsically good what else must it be according to Intuitionism?
Independently good
What does Moore argue Intuitionism allows for?
Objectivity
What is Pritchard’s ‘Ought to Do’?
Sense of obligation is underivative from external evidence, it is impossible to use reason to deduce an ‘ought’
How does Pritchard define general thinking?
Using empirical evidence and reasoning to determine the facts of a situation
How does Pritchard define moral thinking?
Recognition of obligation that arises in the unreflective consciousness
What are 3 challenges to Intuitionism?
- No proof of moral intuition
- Differing intuitive truths
- No way to resolve conflicting intuitions
How is there no proof of moral intuition?
There is no way of verifying intuitive claims, therefore it is unreliable and blind rewarding of moral authority
How are the differing intuitive truths?
Intuition can lead to contrasting conclusions of morality which may be affected by societal or other conditions
How is there no way to resolve conflicting intuitions?
There is no guidance on to choose between different intuitions, the only way to deal with them is by gathering moral facts
Fallibility - Moore
‘that in every way in which it is possible to cognise a true propositions, it is also possible to cognise a false one’
‘Ought to do’ has no definition - Prichard
‘An ‘ought’ if it is to be defined at all, can only be derived from another ‘ought’’
Challenge to Intuitionism - Mackie
‘the suggestion that moral judgements are made, or moral problems solved by just sitting down and having an ethical intuition is a tragedy of actual moral thinking’
What is Emotivism?
The theory that moral facts are more emotional exclamations than reports
Is Emotivism objective?
No - it expresses emotion (descriptive) and aims to evoke a response (prescriptive) so cannot be judged to be true or false
Is Emotivism cognitive?
No - nothing in a moral statement can be considered known or knowable
What is the difference between reporting and expressing a feeling?
- reporting implies a proposition that can be proven true of false
- expressing is non-verifiable
What does Emotivism hold is the purpose of moral language?
To influence others
What is Emotivism also known as?
Boo/Hurrah theory
What does Boo/Hurrah theory account for?
The apparent connection between a statement of moral judgement and the behaviour of the person making the statement
How does Boo/Hurrah theory explain why people disagree on morality?
Different sides may agree on facts but draw a different moral judgement because they replace fact with value
In what work did Ayer write about Emotivism and when?
- ‘Language, Truth and Logic’
- 1936
What are Ayer’s 4 main classes of ethical statement?
- Expression of the legitimacy of definitions of ethical terms
- Phenomena of moral experience and their causes
- Commands designed to provoke action
- Ethical judgements
How does Ayer dismiss Naturalism?
Says it falsely claims that an action that causes happiness cannot be wrong, this is not consistent with language confessions
How does Ayer dismiss Intuitionism?
Falsely assumes people will intuit the same
What is the difference between Emotivism and Subjectivism?
- Emotivism argues morality is a statement of feeling
- Subjectivism understands morality as a proposition about feeling
What is the main objection to Subjectivism?
Morality cannot be absolutely determined by what a person feels
Why does Subjectivism have to treat ethical propositions as infallible?
Since they report on an internal state
What are 3 challenges to Emotivism?
- No basic moral principles
- Pointlessness of ethical debate
- No method of resolution
How does Emotivism have no basic moral principle?
Too reductionist, equating ethics to emitting a noise
How does Emotivism make ethical debate pointless?
If ethics is no more than an emotional outburst makes debate superficial
How does Emotivism lack method of resolution?
Does not distinguish between invalid and valid moral judgements, ignoring ‘correct reasoning’
Ethics is not objective:
- You can only make objective statements based on reliable deduction from evidence
- Jackson argues ethics is not objective unless it originates from an external source
- Morality is only an expression of feeling
Ethics is objective
- Morality can be determined by observing consequences
- Moral statements are the product of cause and effect in nature
- Our moral choices are intrinsically connected to our world
Meta-ethical theories encourage debate:
- Naturalism requires moral agents to evaluate evidence in support of propositions
- DCT encourages debate over the nature of God’s commands (Euthyphro Dilemma)
- Emotivism encourages debate around objective moral facts
Meta-ethical theories do not encourage debate:
- Naturalism argues there are only observable moral facts
- Intuitionism states we simply know morality
- Emotivism states moral statements are devoid of factual content, more to do with psychology
Ethical and non-ethical statements are the same:
- Goodness can be observed just as scientific evidence
- Ethical statements can also be available through sensory evidence
- Not all scientific theories are completely supported, therefore neither need be ethics
Ethical and non-ethical statements aren’t the same:
- Emotivism recognises strong emotions in ethical statements
- Hume argues ethical statements cannot be supported simply be observation (surgery/murder scene)
- Ethical terms are intuitive
Moral terms are intuitive:
- We can sense our moral obligation
- Morality is a gut-reaction based on predetermined values
- Intuition is a lifetime learning that becomes part of our subconscious
Moral terms are not intuitive:
- Hard to distinguish between statements of belief and objectivity
- Influences by societal and cultural values
- Morality is an emotional outburst
Moral terms are expressions:
- Explains why people are often unwilling to change their minds
- It is a cynical and rational view of morality
- Morality cannot just be ‘oughts’ derived from nature
Moral terms are not expressions:
- Emotivism does not account for moral disagreements between people with the same moral view
- Fails to acknowledge connection to reasoning
- Moral judgement is a language of facts so must be supported by evidence
Naturalism is the superior theory:
- Can be understood in relation to verifiable natural phenomena
- Based in universally available evidence
- Practical and applicable
Intuitionism is the superior theory:
- Allows ethics to be factual but not limited by the rules of verification
- Moral statements can be immediately true or false
- Morality can be objectively praised or condemned
Emotivism is the superior theory:
- Universally understandable
- Does not rely on moral faculty
- Founded in observation
Emotivism - Ayer
‘the tone or exclamation mark adds nothing to the literal meaning of the statement’
Emotivism vs. Subjectivism - Ayer
‘for the orthodox Subjectivist does not deny, as we do, that the sentences of a moraliser express genuine propositions… his own view is that they express propositions about the speaker’s feelings’
