Meta Ethics

Question 1

naturalism

Answer 1

the belief that values can be defined in terms of some natural property in the world and its application to absolutism

working out what is right or wrong

Question 2

intuitionalism

Answer 2

the belief that basic morals truth are indefinable but self-evident and its application to the term good

whether good is a meaningful term

Question 3

emotivism

Answer 3

the belief that ethical systems indicate approval or disapproval and its application to relativism

expressing our emotions

Question 4

what is normative ethics

Answer 4

• begins by asking which actions are good/bad and what behaviour is moral/immoral
• aim is to give us a guide
• two main ethical systems within - deontological and teleological which don’t always agree leading some to claim ethical statements are meaningless

Question 5

what is deontological ethics

Answer 5

• concerned with nature of the acts themselves
• acts are intrinsically right or wrong because of an absolute moral law laid down by God or because they go against duty
• e.g. Natural Law (NL) and Kant

Question 6

what is teleological ethics

Answer 6

• concerned with consequences of actions as this determines is rightness or wrongness
• e.g. situation ethics and utilitarianism

Question 7

what is the difference between normative ethics and meta ethics

Answer 7

• normative ethics is concerned with behaviour and doing

- meta ethics concern is meaning

Question 8

what is meta ethics

Answer 8

• explores meaning and function of ethical/moral language
• whether the definitions of moral terms can be defined/agreed upon
• whether they are meaningless
• what we mean when we make a moral statement
• rather than agreeing whether abortion is right or wrong
• interest in what we mean by right or wrong in moral statements

Question 9

what does meta ethics consider

Answer 9

• whether meaning is different in different cultures and times

Question 10

what is the main question of meta ethics

Answer 10

• whether the terms we use in ethical language refer to something real existing out there in the world or something in ourselves e.g. emotions/personal feelings
• whether something is objective fact or subjective personal emotion
• leads to key question of whether ethical language is meaningless or meaningful!!!!

Question 11

what is the Moore quote on intutionism

Answer 11

“If I am asked what is good, my answer is that good is good and that is the end of the matter”

Question 12

what is a key factor in ethical dilemmas

Answer 12

whether something is subjective or objective as people often feel if ethics is subjective its meaningless

Question 13

cognitivism

Answer 13

• objective ethics
• based on fact
• making statements which can be known to be true or false
• ethical statements express propositions which are meaningful declaratives
• naturalism and intuitionism

Question 14

non-cognitivism

Answer 14

• subjective ethics
• ethical statements cannot be proved to be true or false depending on what someone thinks
• ethical statements do not assert propositions
• if they don’t express factual claims and thus neither true or false its impossible for non-cognitivists to define moral terms
• emotivism

Question 15

what is important to note about all the meta-ethical categories

Answer 15

• they don’t agree
• naturalists and intuitionists are cognitive and agree ethical statements are meaningful/based in fact
• but disagree where these facts come from
• naturalism - natural world
• intuitionism - morality based on intuition

Question 16

what are the cognitive bits of the flow chart

Answer 16

• cognitive
• naturalism and intuitionism
• express knowledge so meaningful
• can test them true or false `

Question 17

what are the non-cognitive bits of the flow chart

Answer 17

• non-cognitive
• emotivism
• ethical statements don’t express knowledge but feelings
• non-factual
• so meaningless for people like Ayer

Question 18

why is ethical naturalism an example of cognitivism

Answer 18

• it maintains that ethical values can be demonstrated in the same way as scientific ones were using evidence and proofs
• can test by observation of the natural world where ethics is based
• factual can be verified or falsified

Question 19

how do naturalists believe that moral terms such as good can be defined

Answer 19

• in terms of human nature or properties in the natural world that can be known through or mind or senses
• they may be religious grounded in way God made the world/the capacity for reason we have as shown in NL
• they may be secular based on what makes good consequence of flourishing life

Question 20

what is utlitarianism

Answer 20

• a form of naturalism
• the claim that of Bentham that nature has placed us under two sovereign masters pleasure and pain
• they are natural properties that exist and we all feel

Question 21

what do naturalists share in common and where do they differ

Answer 21

• share their certainty we can prove moral judgements to be true or false
• believe goodness is a natural property located in the natural world
• disagree what features of natural life are good

Question 22

what is Merriman’s quote and what does it teach us (naturalism)

Answer 22

teaches naturalists believe by observing/considering naturally occurring facts we can conclude what is moral behaviour

• natural ethics derive from what is observable e.g. empirical facts about natural order
• its prescriptions are thus apparent to any individual who studies and reasons to the correct procedural behaviours necessary to accomplish ends in accordance with human purpose

Question 23

how do ethical naturalists reach their conclusions

Answer 23

• observe the world, reason, conclude what is right and wrong
• by going from what ‘is’ to what ‘ought’ to be

Question 24

what is an is and an ought for ethical naturalists

Answer 24

• an is is a statement of fact about the world we have observed
• an ought is a value statement about how we should behave, the conclusion of our observation and reason

Question 25

give an example of ethical naturalists deriving and ought from an is and how opinions about this may differ

Answer 25

"heterosexual sex is the natural way to procreate; therefore heterosexual ought to be the only sex people have" - for some naturalists each bit is as factual as the other - but it depends on what natural properties we use to define goodness - a utilitarian would define goodness as that which produces the most pleasure and say the main issue of sex is pleasure and preference - whereas in NL procreation is good and a primary precept so would derive this ought from this is

Question 26

What is intuition

Answer 26

The act or faculty of knowing or sensing without the use of rational processes You just know But we do need to use rational processes for moral decision making

Question 27

How are intuitionists similar to ethical naturalists

Answer 27

Believe we can be certain about what is right and wrong | That moral statements are factual and therefore can be proven to be true or false

Question 28

What is the difference between ethical naturalists and intuitionists even though they are both cognitive

Answer 28

Difference as to how we know right and wrong Naturalists believe goodness is a property in the natural world and moral statements can be derived from facts (ought/is) Intuitionists agree there are objective moral facts but knowledge is innately or intuitively known

Question 29

How do intuitionists believe we make moral judgements

Answer 29

We have a special form of consciousness called intuition that accesses moral knowledge and leads to moral judgements and actions This doesn’t mean all moral decisions reached by relying on intuition But it enables discovery of basic moral truths and everyday moral decision making then involves thinking about the choices available and making moral judgements in like with these basic moral truths

Question 30

What is the criticism of Hume towards naturalism

Answer 30

“Moving from an objective statement of fact to a subjective statement of value does not work because it leaves open questions that have not been answered” - fact value gap - an ought can’t be derived from an is - evaluation can’t be derived DIRECTLY from fact - too many other layers going on and it depends on individuals values

Question 31

What is the fact value gap criticism of naturalism

Answer 31

- can’t derive an ought from an is - can’t draw ethical conclusions from non ethical premises (facts) - moral rules are a product of culture - cannot be established with the objective certainty available in matters of science/logic through empirical evidence and facts

Question 32

what did Moore argue naturalism does and is flawed for

Answer 32

- ethical naturalism makes the mistake of assuming that moral statements can be verified simply by looking at the evidence available to the 5 senses

Question 33

what is the naturalistic fallacy Moore argues about naturalism

Answer 33

- naturalism makes a mistake in defining goodness as a natural property in the world - a flawed or false notion that moral term can be defined

Question 34

what does Moore argue about ethical language

Answer 34

- ethical language ascribes qualities to actions in the same way you ascribe the quality of colour to a rose - goodness resists definition - can only be described with examples of itself - by trying to define goodness you lesson what it actually is - there is no sufficient definition of it

Question 35

give the quote of Moore in explaining the naturalistic fallacy

Answer 35

- "If I am asked what is good my answer is that good is good and that is the end of the matter" - "good is a simple notion that cannot be explained to anyone who does not already know it just like colour"

Question 36

what approach does Moore suggest instead of naturalism due to the naturalistic fallacy

Answer 36

- advocated the cognitive approach of intuitionism - argument that although qualities like goodness resist definition we can still intuitively recognise them when we see them even if we can't define them - when intuitionists say something is good they're not merely expressing opinion but making a judgement about something of which they can be certain we are just unable to define them

Question 37

who is emotivism associated with

Answer 37

- Ayer | - Stevenson

Question 38

what type of ethical theory is emotivism and why

Answer 38

- non-cognitivism - non-cog argues no ethical knowledge as ethical statements can't be proved true or false and non-cognitivists make a distinction between facts and values - emotivism suggests when we make ethical statements we express statements of opinion and not fact

Question 39

what does emotivism have its roots in

Answer 39

- logical positivism and the Vienna Circle - embraced scientific method of verification - emotivism holds that ethical statements can't be verified and so are not genuine truth claims and can only express feelings - analytic synthetic stuff

Question 40

what is the only way statements like adultery is wrong can be understood for Emotivists

Answer 40

- as an expression of feelings of approval or disapproval - often called hurrah/boo theory - to say lying is wrong is to boo lying and express a feeling of disapproval about it - ascribing behaviour to not lie

Question 41

give Ayer's quote about emotivism and hurrah/boo theory

Answer 41

- "in saying a certain type of action is right or wrong I am not making any factual statement" - "merely expressing moral sentiments" - "the man contradicting me is merely expressing his moral sentiments so there is plainly no sense in asking which of us is in the right for neither of us is asserting a genuine proposition"

Question 42

what did Ayer think about moral arguments

Answer 42

- moral arguments serve no real purpose as they're simply an expression of feeling - but did suggest they are also calculated to arouse feeling and stimulate action - "we may define ethical words in terms of the feelings they express and the responses they are calculated to provoke"

Question 43

what did C.L Stevenson contribute to emotivism

Answer 43

- he built on Ayer's theory arguing moral judgements have two elements: an expression of attitude based on belief and a persuasive element which seeks to influence others - didn't use verification - works for scientific terms but insufficient for ethical language - discussed emotive meaning of moral terms as descriptive and emotive

Question 44

discuss the dynamic way of saying something argued in emotivism

Answer 44

- you are guilty of having non-consensual sex - you are guilty of rape - both mean the same - but word rape often has more emotive response than just describing it - thus language has descriptive and dynamic use - saying something is wrong is the dynamic way of saying you disagree with an action and is an attempt to persuade the other person

Question 45

how did Stevenson see ethical statements

Answer 45

- not only as an expression of emotions but also as result of attitudes based on fundamental beliefs

Question 46

what did Stevenson think about moral disagreement

Answer 46

- disagreements about fundamental principles - attitudes formed by these principles/beliefs - Ayer thought moral statements were emotive expressions - Stevenson maintained that a moral disagreement tells us something about a person's beliefs rather than simply illustrating a 'hurrah/boo' emotive shouting match - Stevenson appreciated the strong roots that underlie people's ethical disagreements more fully than Ayer - for Ayer its meaningless because the facts have been agreed upon but the opinions are unverifiable - arguments have meaning because based on fundamental belief about objective facts

Question 47

what did Stevenson ultimately think

Answer 47

- even for Stevenson moral judgements/statements don't imply any kind of objective truth or fact - ultimately considered moral statements as the result of subjective opinions, views, beliefs

Question 48

what is different about emotivism compared to naturalism and intuitionism

Answer 48

- no universal truth or absolute right or wrong in emotivism