META-ETHICS Flashcards
Define cognitive language
Moral language can be shown to be true or false
Define non-cognitive language
Moral language cannot be proven to be true or false
Define realism
Moral truths do exist and are real features of society
Define anti-realism
There are no real truths in the world, including moral truths
Define naturalism
Moral truths can be observed and discovered empirically
Define intuitionism
Moral truths do exist but cannot be discovered in the same way as other truths
Define emotivism
Moral truths do not exist, we are simply expressing emotion or opinion
What are Mackie’s ethics?
Inventing right or wrong objects to absolute and natural approaches to morality.
He is an anti-realist and an intuitionist
What is Mackie’s error theory?
Claim 1: There are no moral features - we cannot see moral properties.
Claim 2: No moral judgements are true - we cannot attach properties to them.
Claim 3: Our moral judgements fail to describe the moral properties of things - we fall into error of judgement.
In conclusion: There is no moral knowledge.
(INTUITIONIST)
What is Mackie’s idea of cultural relativism?
We can measure morality in relation to established moral institutions (traditions/customs).
This morality only holds value in our own minds in relation to the institution.
(INTUITIONIST)
What does G.E Moore say about good?
It is a simple notion which cannot be broken down - since it fails the open question argument.
“If I am asked what is good? My answer is that good is good and that is the end of the matter”
What does G.E Moore say about the naturalistic fallacy?
Just because something can be observed in nature doesn’t mean it is morally correct as moral claims do not derive from reason but from sentiment.
What does G.E Moore say about intuitionism?
He still believes in objective moral knowledge but we arrive at that knowledge through our intuition.
We intuit the non-natural property of goodness and it is up to us to use practical reasoning/science to work out methods which get the most right done.
How does David Hume challenge naturalism?
He says that moral claims are not derived from reason.
IN A Treatise of Human Nature he rejected the idea that moral good or evil can be distinguished using reason.
(ANTI-REALIST)
David Hume quote which rejects naturalism
“Tis the object of feeling, not of reason. It lies in yourself, not in the object”
What is David Hume’s law and how does it challenge naturalism?
Just because something is seen in nature, doesn’t mean it ought to be done or is morally correct.
We can’t reduce morality to what we see in nature.
(ANTI-REALIST)
How does Phillipa Foot challenge Hume?
She suggests that moral evil is “a kind of natural defect”
There are virtues, characteristics and behaviours that aim to do some good.
We can observe these by looking at how a person acts.
If we look at the natural world we see there are patterns of excellence and defect that relate to the function/purpose of living things. Foot argues that this applies to morality too.
(NATURALIST)
What does WD Ross say about moral truths?
There are real objective moral truths but they are not absolutes. They are simple rather than compound.
Our moral intuitions sort out basic morthal truths, guiding and motivating our moral judgements/actions.
He rejects the principle that pleasure equates to goodness (Mill and Bentham)
(INTUITIONIST)
What are WD Ross’ prima facie duties?
Actions that we have some moral reason to perform or avoid.
These are duties that always have some moral weight.
- Fidelity
- Reparation
- Gratitude
- Justice
- Beneficence
- Non-malevolence
- Self-improvement
These duties may conflict but will intuit different moral obligations.
(INTUITIONIST)
What does HA Pritchard say about reason and intuition?
In his essay “Does moral philosophy rest on a mistake?” he states that reason collects the facts and intuition determines the course to follow
Personal introspection accesses some standard sense of moral law and acts on it.
Intuitions are not merely subjective opinions but direct knowledge by rational sight.
Different people have different levels of moral intuition - hence why varying decisions are made in the same moral dilemma.
(INTUITIONIST)
What does AJ Ayer say about moral statements?
A meaningful statement is one which can be verified. So synthetic (can be verified) or analytic (true by definition) statements.
Moral statements do not fit into either of these and are therefore meaningless.
SO…Moral statements are merely humans expressing moral sentiments (their opinion/emotion towards an action)
