4.1 Meta-Ethics

Question 1

what is meta-ethics

Answer 1

meta-ethics analyses the reasoning behind ethical language and moral terms such as ‘good’ and ‘right’

Question 2

two main views of meta-ethics: cognitivism

Answer 2

• moral truths exist independently of our mind, moral judgments can be true or false
• terms such as ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ correspond to facts in the world

Question 3

two main views of meta-ethics: non-cognitivism

Answer 3

• there is no such thing as moral truth within the world
• what we call moral facts are just subjective moral responses

Question 4

realism

Answer 4

moral truths exist independently of human opinion (objective morality)

Question 5

anti-realism

Answer 5

moral truths do not exist independently and instead bases on human attitidues, emotions, agreements

Question 6

how does ethical naturalism support cognitivism?

Answer 6

• treats moral statements as objectively true or false based on empirical facts
• so, it aligns with a cognitivist approach to moral language

Question 7

what is ethical naturalism?

Answer 7

ethical naturalism argues that moral statements are factual and can be verified using empirical evidence

Question 8

ethical naturalism - strengths

Answer 8

• accounts for moral feelings when we feel outraged by clear injustice
• moral statements are meaningful; unlike emotivism, treats moral claims as factual
• compatible with science; aligns with scientific teachings about human behaviour and well-being

Question 9

ethical naturalism - weaknesses

Answer 9

• the naturalistic fallacy (g.e moor): terms like “good” cannot be defined in terms of ethical properties (eg pleasure)
• the is-ought problem (hume): you cannot logically derive moral oglibations from factual statements
• moral disagreements persist: if morality was based on objective, natural facts, we could expect less disagreement within ethics

Question 10

what is emotivism?

Answer 10

moral statements are not statements but expressions/indicators of emotional states

Question 11

how did a.j ayer positivism influence emotivism?

Answer 11

• as it argues that only statements verified by emprical evidence/logial reasoning are meaningful

Question 12

what is the ‘boo-hurrah’ theory?

Answer 12

• ayer’s idea that moral statements simply express approval or disapproval
• eg) stealing is wrong = boo to stealin g

Question 13

what is prescriptivism?

Answer 13

• the belief that moral statements prescribe actions rather than simply express emotions

Question 14

who developed prescriptivism?

Answer 14

r.m hare

Question 15

how is prescriptivism different to emotivism?

Answer 15

• prescriptivism sees moral language as action-guiding, where emotivism sees it as emotional expression

Question 16

strengths of emotivism

Answer 16

• promotes tolerance of different viewpoints
• supported by verification principle
• explains moral disagreement

Question 17

emotivism weaknesses

Answer 17

• reduces morality to subjective feelings
• cannot resolve moral disagreements
• undermines moral progress

Question 18

A.J Ayer Emotivism

Answer 18

• as moral statements are neither logical nor provable by the senses, so are factually meaningless
• emotional statements instead show emotional states/feelings, merely convey an approving/disapproving tone

Question 19

intuitionalism

Answer 19

• moral truths are indefinable and self-evident, we know ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ can’t be discovered - instead they are self evident
• like naturalism, its a moral realist and cognitivist theory

Question 20

G.E Moore - Intuitionalism

Answer 20

• we don’t recognise through empirical facts: the ‘good’ is self-evident to our intuition
• good is a ‘simple concept’ which we ‘just know’ intuitively
• eg) wouldn’t know how to describe colour yellow, we just know

Question 21

normative ethics

Answer 21

first-order ethical questions about how we should behave, and ethical norms

Question 22

applied ethics

Answer 22

applying normative principles and arguments to particular areas, eg medical ethics

Question 23

naturalistic fallacy

Answer 23

criticism of naturalism that we cannot assume that just because something is natural doesn’t mean its good

Question 24

moral realism (discovery)

Answer 24

belief that right and wrong objectively exist independently from the mind, they are real properties known via observation

Question 25

St Thomas Aquinas

Answer 25

- NML is an example of theological naturalism - the world has a God-given order built into it - moral values can be worked out though understanding our God-given purpose and observing natural order

Question 26

Jeremy Bentham

Answer 26

- Utilitarian thinkers like Bentham and John Stuart Mill believed humans can discover right/wrong through discovering actions lead to pleasure/pain

Question 27

moral anti-realism (decide)

Answer 27

- right and wrong do not objectively exist independently from the mind - different anti-realist theories disagree how we should understand moral language eg) whether it attempts to make claims about objective properties

Question 28

strengths of naturalism

Answer 28

- makes morality objective - fits with widely used normative theories - accounts for moral disagreements

Question 29

weaknesses of naturalism

Answer 29

- hume is-ought distinction (not able to empirically the rightness/wrongness of an action) - ge moore naturalistic fallacy (natural doesn't mean good) - overlooks human subjectivity (naturalism often reduces human behaviour is biological/environmental determinism)