Meta Ethics

Question 1

Cognitivism

Answer 1

Claims that ethical language expresses ethical beliefs about how the world is. They can be regarded as statements about facts that can be proved true or false

Question 2

Non-cognitivism

Answer 2

View that moral utterances are neither true or false statements. When someone makes a moral statement they are not describing a fact but expressing a feeling.

Question 3

Naturalism

Answer 3

The idea that good exists

Question 4

Non-naturalism/intuitionism

Answer 4

Can recognise something as good but you cannot know what that good thing is

Question 5

Emotivism

Answer 5

Good and bad are personal reactions not something that actually exists

Question 6

Prescriptivism

Answer 6

Things generate an emotional response - if things look bad to most people then it it shouldn’t happen

Question 7

Ethical Naturalism

Answer 7

Moral values can be defined in terms of factual statements. Moral knowledge can be derived from an empirical study of the facts of human existence. Good exists, it is a thing so you can suggest that people do it.

Question 8

Problems of Ethical Naturalism

Answer 8

• It can be argued that “natural” does not necessarily mean “good”
• Happiness is something people generally strive for, but it may be questioned whether happiness equates to good

Question 9

Strengths of Ethical Naturalism

Answer 9

• Basing our ethics on observation that can be evidenced and reasoned over offers a solid foundation for contesting controversial issues and resolving disputes
• Affirming naturalism can motivate protests against injustice or form a basis for natural rights

Question 10

How is Hume’s “is ought” gap a weakness of ethical naturalism?

Answer 10

• if Hume is right, then “ought” statements cannot be derived from “is “ statements. This fact-value gap cannot be bridged by drawing ethical conclusions from non-ethical premises
• Is good objective or subjective?

Question 11

David Hume’s weakness of Ethical Naturalism

Answer 11

The ‘is-ought’ gap:
* You can’t use what is to prove that ought to be
* Ought statements do not fit into synthetic or analytic statements. They are not objective

Question 12

How does Philippa Foot counter Hume?

Answer 12

• She argues that there are virtues, characters or behaviours that aim at some good
• The moral person is someone who keeps promises, and who defends those who’s rights are being violated

Question 13

What is G.E. Moore’s ‘Open Question Argument’?

Answer 13

Believed that moral statements are subjective to the open question attack, which questions whether a particular natural property is, in fact, good

Question 14

What are the three claims that intuitionism is said to make?

Answer 14

1. ‘good’ is indefinable
2. there are objective moral truths
3. basic moral truths are self-evident through intuition

Question 15

What does A.J. Ayer say about emotivism?

Answer 15

• ‘Good’ is simply something that gives you a positive feeling
• ‘Bad’ is something you dislike
• Therefore, moral statements are meaningless as they are no more that expressions of emotion

Question 16

Logical Positivism

Answer 16

Statements are only meaningful if they can be verified or falsified:
a. by observation (synthetic statements)
b. by logic (analytic statements)
Moral statements are neither and therefore are meaningless

Question 17

C.L. Stevenson main points

Answer 17

Moral statements are based on 2 thing:
a. an expression of an attitude/emotion
b. a persuasive element- a desire to influence the feelings/behaviour of others
Moral statements are more than emotive- they are based on attitudes, principles, and beliefs as well as observation of consequences so they are meaningful