Dillon Precious Meta Ethics
Meta Ethics:
Involves the language of ethics – good vs bad.
Think of words like “good” – what do we mean by the term “good.” It has lots of different
definitions and uses.
Functional Moral
Descriptive - one that attempts to describe how a word is Prescriptive - one that prescribes how a word should be used.
used
“This wine is good because x.” “This person is good because they care for others.”
Some think ethical statements are either true or false and can be verified / falsified from
observable facts (empiricism).
o But it is possible for people to disagree with a moral statement without empirical
evidence (e.g., religious law).
Cognitivists think that ethical language carries truth values with it. Either it is true or false
that “I am an excellent ethicist.”
Non-Cognitivists think that there is no truth value in ethical language. It is often seen as
meaningless. So “I am an excellent ethicist” is a subjective statement that only exhibits
emotions, not facts.
Realists say that moral facts are objective facts that are out there in the world.
Anti-Realists deny the objective existence of moral facts.
G.E. Moore was one of the first people to decided that defining such terms was an
important issue.
o He believed in ethical naturalism (Definism, the problem of defining ethical terms).
“Good” has many uses, a person is good as a moral prescriptive whereas a pen is good
because it fulfils its role (descriptive).
Emotivism:
o A.J. Ayer (1910-1989):
Ethical Non-Cognitivism, Prescriptivism.
Also known as the “Boo-hurrah”.
Ethical language is not meaningful according to Ayer’s Emotivism.
Prescriptivism:
o Universal prescriptivism (often simply called prescriptivism) is the meta-ethical view
which claims that, rather than expressing propositions, ethical sentences function
similarly to imperatives which are universalizable—whoever makes a moral
judgment is committed to the same judgment in any situation where the same
relevant facts pertain.
o R.M Hare (1919-2002):
People prescribe moral statements; these prescriptions can however be
subjective because people may prescribe conflicting judgements.
Is ethical language meaningful?
Naturalists (YES) would produce some criteria that we can use to assess the question and try
to get an answer that is provable with empirical evidence (senses). Naturalism says that all
things are knowable using empirical evidence. We can say ethical statements are accurate,
using empirical data, like we can say abut other statements.
Non-Naturalism (YES) “good” cannot be defined by any type of natural existence, good is
not something that can be found in things but is used to describe an object or action.
Meta Ethics:
Involves the language of ethics – good vs bad.
Think of words like “good” – what do we mean by the term “good.” It has lots of different
definitions and uses.
Functional Moral
Descriptive - one that attempts to describe how a word is Prescriptive - one that prescribes how a word should be used.
used
“This wine is good because x.” “This person is good because they care for others.”
Some think ethical statements are either true or false and can be verified / falsified from
observable facts (empiricism).
o But it is possible for people to disagree with a moral statement without empirical
evidence (e.g., religious law).
Cognitivists think that ethical language carries truth values with it. Either it is true or false
that “I am an excellent ethicist.”
Non-Cognitivists think that there is no truth value in ethical language. It is often seen as
meaningless. So “I am an excellent ethicist” is a subjective statement that only exhibits
emotions, not facts.
Realists say that moral facts are objective facts that are out there in the world.
Anti-Realists deny the objective existence of moral facts.
G.E. Moore was one of the first people to decided that defining such terms was an
important issue.
o He believed in ethical naturalism (Definism, the problem of defining ethical terms).
“Good” has many uses, a person is good as a moral prescriptive whereas a pen is good
because it fulfils its role (descriptive).
Emotivism:
o A.J. Ayer (1910-1989):
Ethical Non-Cognitivism, Prescriptivism.
Also known as the “Boo-hurrah”.
Ethical language is not meaningful according to Ayer’s Emotivism.
Prescriptivism:
o Universal prescriptivism (often simply called prescriptivism) is the meta-ethical view
which claims that, rather than expressing propositions, ethical sentences function
similarly to imperatives which are universalizable—whoever makes a moral
judgment is committed to the same judgment in any situation where the same
relevant facts pertain.
o R.M Hare (1919-2002):
People prescribe moral statements; these prescriptions can however be
subjective because people may prescribe conflicting judgements.
Is ethical language meaningful?
Naturalists (YES) would produce some criteria that we can use to assess the question and try
to get an answer that is provable with empirical evidence (senses). Naturalism says that all
things are knowable using empirical evidence. We can say ethical statements are accurate,
using empirical data, like we can say abut other statements.
Non-Naturalism (YES) “good” cannot be defined by any type of natural existence, good is
not something that can be found in things but is used to describe an object or action.
