Meta-Ethical theories

• meta ethics


  area of ethics that seeks to explore and discover the meaning of words used in ethical statements
• normative ethics


  area of ethics that attempts to discuss whether something is right or wrong, good or bad
• empirical evidence


  information that is gained using sensory data
• cognitive


  statement that is subject to being true or false
• non-cognitive


  statement that is not subject to truth or falsity
• a priori / analytical statement


  statements that are true by definition
• synthetic statement

  statements in which the predicate is not a necessary part of the description
• naturalism 


  belief that suggests that all things are knowable using empirical evidence
• non - naturalism


  belief that all things to do with meaning are knowable using intuition rather than empirical evidence
• intuitionism 


  theory that ethical + moral truths are known and understood by our intuition
• prima facie duties


  translates as "at first appearance". Means these duties are primary ones
• emotivism 


  idea that the meaning of ethical language is not knowable as it's use is only an expression of emotion
• boo hurrah theory 


  another name for emotivism
• prescriptivism:


  idea that the meaning of ethical language is not knowable as it is a manner of prescribing a subjective belief or course of action
• naturalistic fallacy:


  claims that good cannot be defined and that attempting to provide ethical conclusions from natural facts is wrong
• Hume's law


  you cannot go from an 'is' ( a statement of fact) to an 'ought' (a moral statement)
• vienna circle:


  group of philosophers known as logical positivists who rejected vlaims that moral truth can be verified as objectiviely true
• absolutism


  view that morals are fixed, unchanging truths that everyone should follow
• relativism


  view that moral truths are not fixed and are not absolute. What is right changes according to the individual, the situation, the culture, the time and the place
• Problems with ethical language: A.J. Ayer

  • thought that religious and ethical claims are non cognitive - therefore impossible to verify = meaningless
  • statements can only be meaningful if they can be demonstrated through

  1. analytical/ a priori statements
  2. synthetic / a posteriori statements
• Can ethical statements have meaning in a factual sense: yes

  ethical naturalists

  • ethical statements can be cognitive because we use empirical evidence
  • e.g. 'murder is wrong' - is stated by observing the effects of the action a widow or mother who has lost a child
  • objective -- not influencd by personal feelings -- murder is wrong because of its effects
• Can ethical statements have meaning in a factual sense: yes

  intuitionism

  • what is good or bad is known but not defined by experience
  • some things just can't be explained -- intuition
  • G. E. Moore -- have a sense of what is right and wrong. Moral statements can't be proven, we just know intuitively. Good is a simple notion that can't be broken down and measure
• Good is good, everything is what it is and not another thing

  G.E. Moore == intuitionism
• What naturalists believe:

  • all ethical statements are natural - verified through evidence
  • absolute facts of the natural world that everyone should follow
  • observing the effects of the actions
• F.H. Bradley (1846-1924)

  • an ethical naturals
  • duty is universal and concrete - moral truths can be proved like scientific truths -- not our point of view but fixed
  • objective
  • conceptual links to the natural moral law of Aquinas
  • Has a fixed moral social order which is questionable
• Hedonic Naturalist:


  link goodness to pleasure
• David Hume (1711 - 76):

  • moral claims are not derived from reason but rather sentiment
  • rejected the idea that moral good or evil can be distinguished using reason
  • morals excile passions but reason is impotent in matters of morality
  • writers on morality often move from 'is' to 'ought' statements and Hume believed this was unjustified
• “Nature has placed us under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do … a man may pretend to abjure their empire: but in reality he will remain subject to it all the while”. 


  Bentham
• Philipa Foot (1920-2010)

  • moral person is someone who can keep promises, defends those whose rights are being violated
  • moral person has qualities which for them are the reason they carry out certain actions and this can be observed
  • virtues, characteristics or behaviours that aim at some good = Aritotlian idea
  • draw's on Aristoles observation that the natural world includes a good way of doing things - life patterns
  • used the example of an oak tree
• J.L. Mackie (1917-81):

  • possible to describe the institution on the outside make observations inside
  • breaking a promise depends on the rules within the institution
  • moral rules can be disputed - depending on our relationship with the people affected
  • following the rules of an institution - not the same as acting logically
  • moral rules can be observed -- based on tradition rather than being absolute constructs
• G.E. Moore (1873-1958): Intuitionism

  • Principia Ethica (1903) - he thought that intrinsically, good things exist for their own sake, they cannot be analysed or broken down
  • not about proving these things but rather seeing them
  • we should do the that that causes the most good to exist
  • good (according to Moore) - rejected utilitarians who argued that good could be measured
  • Naturalistic Fallacy -- good cannot be defined
  • good is a simple notion - just like the colour yellow -- you know it when you see it
  • good is pleasure etc are making it complex
  • good can be known BUT NOT defined
• H.A Prichard (1871-1947): intutionism

  • argues that it is a hopeless quest to try to find arguments to determine what our moral obligations are
  • argues that there is a gap between the good thing and the idea of what things i have a duty to bring
  • difficult to define go and obligation (what we ought to do)
  • everyone can recognise what they ought to do in certain situations
  • intuitionism was about joining reason with ought to determine the moral action
  • moral dilemma - intuition decides
  • different intuition - should go with ought to do
• W.D. Ross (1877-1951): intuitionism -- primary duties

  • was Prichard's student and agreed with Prichard and Moore by saying that 'right' and 'obligatory' were as indefinable as 'good'
  • set out to try and understand the sorts of moral principles that people might use when answering a moral question
  • principles can conflict and therefore aren't absolute -- but duties could be
  • prima facie duties
  • making judgements is difficult and not without error - improve our ability
  • took account of clashes of apparent absolutes - Ross helps provide an answer
• What are Ross' 7 Prima Facie?


  1. fidelity
  2. reparation
  3. gratitude
  4. justice
  5. helping others
  6. self-improvement
  7. not harming others
• What are the cognitivist theories for meta-ethics?


  Naturalism and intuition/non-naturalism
• What is the non-cognitivist meta ethical theories and or critiques on congitivist ethical theories?


  Emotivism and prescriptivism
• What is emotivism?

  • By definition: ethical theories that hold moral statements are not statements but are beliefs or emotions. ​
  • The Vienna Circle (1920s) were a group of philosophers who both disagreed with intuitionism and naturalism. ​
  • They believed that Hume's Law was a correct idea.​
  • Emotivists believe that attempting to determine what it right and wrong morally is meaningless.
• Emotivism is not ... 


  a standalone theory but a response/ criticism towards non-cognitive arguments.​ Helps us understand moral statements
• A.J AYER – BOO/HURRAH THEORY​

  • Believes only two kinds of statements are meaningful – synthetic (factual) and analytic (logical). ​
  • Morals are relative only to our feelings or emotions​
  • They tell us about the person and their emotions, not the external world​
  • Ethical statements are not verifiable and can only be understood as an expression of feelings. ​
  • They are no kind of fact or knowledge at all, but simply utterances that are relative to emotive responses – in the same category as expressions of preferences, attitude or feelings​
• C.L. Stevenson: pt 1

  • Stevenson mostly developed Ayer's theory and advanced emotivism as a meta-ethical theory.​
  • main addition was highlighting the difference between cognitive and non-cognitive uses of language.​
  • He argued for there being two uses of emotive meaning: descriptive and dynamic.​
  • Dynamic is used when a person's disapproving or approving feelings.​