Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

RS > Meta Ethics Essay > Flashcards

Meta Ethics Essay Flashcards

1
Q

what is essay 1 ?

A

Good is best explained by emotivism.’ Discuss.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

what is ur view essay 1 ?

A

Emotivism is successful.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what is intro essay 1 ?

A

Ethical theories that hold that moral statements are not statements of fact but statements of beliefs or emotions.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

what scholars essay 1 ?

A

AJ Ayer, Phillipa Foot, Stevenson, Daniel Goleman, Mill.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

what is point para 1 essay 1 ?

A

AJ Ayer’s verification principle - statement is meaningful if its analytical or synthetic.

When we use ethical language , we are not judging morality or making normative truth claims - we are simply expression emotion and preferences.

It has an easier task of explaining why people have different moral views on many topics - this is because there is no right and wrong, no facts about them , just feelings which vary between people and societies.

FIND QUOTE FROM AYER

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what is counterargument para 1 essay 1 ?

A

No unanimous decisions will ever be made if ethical terms are dependant on the individual view. - widely agreed decision will not be made.

PHILLIPA FOOT - it seems to trivialise ethical discussions - uses example of concentration camps - significant event should’nt be reduced to a matter of opinion.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

how will you counteract counterargument para 1 essay 1 ?

A

STEVENSON - backs up Ayer- Ethical language is reciprocal - when we say to someone that murder is wrong we expect them to agree.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what is point in para 2 essay 1 ?

A

Rejects the view that good, bad, right and wrong exist. Recognises the disputes in ethics are often driven by feelings rather than reasons. - echoes work of physcologist Daniel Goleman - emotional part of brain reacts before the reasoning part kicks in.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

what is counterargument para 2 essay 1 ?

A

Others such as naturalism are better. - ethical theories that hold that morals are part of the natural world and can be recognised or observed in some way.

Mill- We are able to know what is desireable/good as these are the things that people actually desire.

Very fact that people all want happiness is enough to show that happiness is actually a good thing.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

how will you counteract the counterargument para 2 essay 1 ?

A

Naturalistic Fallacy. - Just because something is natural, then it must be good, but this isn’t always the case.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

what is essay 2 ?

A

Assess intuitionsim

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what is ur view essay 2 ?

A

its positive/ successful

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

what is the intro of essay 2 ?

A

ethical theories that hold that moral knwoledge is recieved differently from science /logic.
cognitive and relaist

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

what scholars essay 2 ?

A

Pritchard

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

what is point para 1 essay 2 ?

A

Suggests that good, bad , right and wrogn actually exist but cannot be seen or discovered in thr same way as other facts.

It recognises there is considerable moral agreement in the world - give examples ??

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

what is counterargument para 1 essay2 ?

A

There is also a lot of moral disagreement in the world. Lots of different religions and cultures.This is particularly difficult for intuitionists who say that these truths are self-evident to all.

17
Q

how will you counteract the counterargument in para 1 essay 2 ?

A

Pritchard - intuitionist - intuitions made by some people are better than others .

We have similar human nature.

18
Q

what is point in para 2 essay 2 ?

A

Acknowledges cultural relativism.

Also unlike naturalism, intuitionism takes the fact - values problems seriously and does not attempt to find moral values through observation of the world.

19
Q

what is the counterargument in para2 essay 2 ?

A

Other positives to naturalism - the fact that we largely agree on what is right and wrong suggests this is a factual matter rather than a matter of opinion.

Intuitionism - makes ethics feel like maths - truths are self-evident and just obviously true - they are not the same whatever.

20
Q

how will you counteract the counterargument in para 2 essay 2 ?

A

NATURALISTIC FALLACY - just because something is natural doesn’t mean it is good.

21
Q

what is essay 3 ?

A

assess naturalism

22
Q

what is ur view essy 3 ?

A

successful

23
Q

what is intro essay 3 ?

A

ethical theories that hold that morals are part of the world and can be recognised or observed in some way. Its realist and cognitive.

24
Q

what scholars essay 3 /.

A

GE MOORE , Mill, Aquinas.

25
Q

what is the point in para 1 essay 3 ?

A

Mill’s naturalism - based on utilitarianism - greatest good for the greatest number. We are able to see that certain actions lead to pleasure and certain actions lead to pain - we are able to know what is good or desirable as these are the things that people actually desire.

The very fact that all people want happiness is enough to show that happiness is a good thing.

26
Q

what is the counterargument para 1 essay 3 ?

A

GE MOORE - critic of Mill.

Open question argument - pleasure cannot be the same thing as goodness as it is still possible to ask if the pleasure is truly good.

27
Q

how will you counteract the counterargument para 1 essay 3 ?

A

Its a scientific approach because it is empirical and this is favoured by modern society so may be more believable.

By investigating the impact that something has , we have coclusive proof that it is either good or bad.

28
Q

what is the point in para 2 essay 3 ?

A

Aquinas Naturalism - Natural Law /telos - everything has a purpose we can observe how good something is by asking whether its fulfilling its purpose.

29
Q

what is the counterargument para 2 essay 3 ?

A

Aquinas Naturalism - make the assumption that there is a purpose or telos for humans , and this may ulitmately require the existence of God.

Many modern philosophers would reject these assumptions. If there is no definite purpose ,there cannot be any definite ideas of goodness.

So does it exist ???

30
Q

how will you counteract the counterargument para 2 essay 3 ?

A

Naturalism gives morality a set of absolutes - links to NL. e.g. murder is wrong. This matches a moral agent’s common sense view of ethics.

RS (47 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions