Naturalism

Cards (7)

  • Moral Values can be correctly defined by observation of the outside world
  • Scholars - Jeremy Bentham and J.S. Mill
    We can discover right/wrong by discovering what actions lead to pleasure/pain. Because pleasure is something we naturally seek, it must be good.
    "Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure"- Bentham. Because something is natural, it tells us what to do/avoid.
  • Scolars - Thomas Aquinas

    Theological naturalism. The world has god-given order integrated into it, morality can be worked out by understanding our god-given purpose.
    The right way to live in accordance to NML, as the 5 precepts are discovered.
  • Scholars - F.H Bradley
    It is possible to understand our moral duties by observing our position in life (link to Kantian ethics).
  • A01
    Morally realist, right and wrong objectively exist. There are moral facts. Cognitive, it conveys a fact and is objective, morality derives from external factors beyond personal preference. What is right/wrong can be established by empirical observation.
  • Strengths
    Makes morality objective, therefore morality is universal. This therefore gives morality importance rather than being a matter of opinion. It gives morality a set of ethical absolutes which makes assertions wrong eg. Murder/Rape are wrong.
    Fits w/ widely used normative ethical theories. It's a popular approach to understanding morality that clearly has real-world relevance. NML is the fundamental basis of the RCC which had 1.4 billion baptised members as of 2021.
  • Weaknesses
    G.E. Moores Naturalistic Fallacy, is it true that what's natural is good? Is pleasure really good? The fact that the answer could be 'no' shows that natural properties do not equate to goodness. Just because something is natural, doesn't mean it's good. eg. Cancer.
    Hume: Is-Ought distinction. No matter how closely we observe a situation, we can't empirically examine the rightness/wrongness of an action. There's a difference between what 'is' factually the case and what we think 'ought' to happen. eg. He killed someone vs. It's wrong to kill someone. Interpretation is subjective.