meta ethics- moral realism + moral anti-reaLISM

Question 1

25 mark plan:
what is the meta-ethical status of moral statements such as “murder is wrong”

Answer 1

intro: moral anti-realism is true + moral realism is false.
define: moral realism, anti-realism

para1: for, realism Mills proof of utilitarianism moral properties exist + r natural properties.

response: naturalist fallacy (Moore)

para3: for realism, moral properties - non-natural properties, known thru rational intuition.

response: Mackie, moral properties would be metaphysically = epistemically queer - “intuition” doesn’t explain anything.

para5: against ant-realism, leads to nihilism

response 1: just becos we don’t want moral nihilism to be true, doesn’t show moral ant-realism is false.
response2: r no mind-independent moral properties, there r still reasons one might chose to act in a way we consider good.

conclusion: mind-independent moral properties whether natural or non do not exist. moral anti realism is true but does not lead to nihilism or chaos.

Question 2

define moral realism

Answer 2

-argues mind independent moral properties and facts exist.
so when we make moral judgements e.g. “murder is wrong” these statements r literally true or false in the same way “grass is green”.

Question 3

define moral anti-realism

Answer 3

-argue mind-independent moral properties do not exist.
-no such things as true moral facts.