meta-ethics

What is meta-ethics, and what are the two key aspects it addresses?

Meta-ethics is the study of what "goodness" means, focusing on whether goodness is real (moral realism vs. anti-realism) and what the meaning of the word “good” is (cognitivism vs. non-cognitivism)

What is moral realism?

Moral realism holds that "goodness" is real and exists in reality. Examples include Bentham’s utilitarianism, where pleasure is real, and therefore goodness is real

How does Bentham’s view on naturalism contribute to meta-ethics?

Bentham argues that pleasure is the natural feature that defines goodness (i.e., goodness = pleasure). He claims ethical language is cognitive, as it expresses beliefs that can be true or false

What is Hume’s criticism of naturalism?

Hume argues that we cannot derive an "ought" from an "is." Just because humans naturally seek pleasure, it doesn't mean we ought to maximise it. This highlights a gap between facts and moral values, challenging the realist and cognitivist claims of naturalism

How does modern virtue ethics challenge the criticism of naturalism?

Anscombe and Foot argue that “ought” refers to human needs for flourishing (eudaimonia). For example, adults ought to protect children because children need help to flourish. This can be derived from facts about human flourishing

What is Moore’s intuitionist approach to meta-ethics?

Moore rejects naturalism, claiming that "goodness" is a non-natural property. He uses the naturalistic fallacy and the open question argument to show that goodness cannot be equated to any natural property

What is the open question argument, and how does it critique naturalism?

Moore argues that if goodness = pleasure, then asking "Is pleasure good?" would be meaningless, like asking "Is pleasure pleasure?" This shows that goodness cannot be defined by any natural property

How does intuitionism explain moral agreement across cultures?

Intuitionism argues that people have an intuitive sense of what is right and wrong. This cross-cultural moral agreement suggests that there is something real and non-natural about moral knowledge

What is Mackie’s critique of intuitionism?

Mackie argues that moral beliefs are socially conditioned, not based on objective reality. He proposes error theory, which suggests that all ethical beliefs are false because there is no objective morality

What is Ayer’s emotivism and how does it challenge realism?

Ayer claims that ethical language expresses emotions rather than beliefs. It is a form of anti-realism, asserting that statements like “stealing is wrong” are expressions of emotion (e.g., "boo to stealing") rather than factual statements.

What is the moral nihilism critique of emotivism?

Moral nihilism argues that if ethical language expresses only emotions, then morality becomes pointless. Ayer’s theory would suggest that there are no objective moral truths, leading to nihilism and undermining societal moral codes

What is R.M. Hare’s view on ethical language?

Hare’s prescriptivism claims that ethical language expresses universal prescriptions or commands (e.g., “don’t steal”), which can be debated or reasoned about. This allows for disagreement and moral persuasion, unlike emotivism

How does Mackie critique prescriptivism?

Mackie argues that prescriptivism still assumes ethical language expresses beliefs about reality, which he views as false. Even if ethical language involves prescriptions, it still reflects false beliefs about an objective moral reality that doesn’t exist

What is the final evaluation of the debates in meta-ethics?

Despite different views, moral realism (whether in the form of virtue ethics or intuitionism) offers a stronger foundation for moral claims, as it allows for moral facts that are not merely subjective or based on social conditioning. The anti-realist positions fail to provide a satisfactory explanation for moral discourse