Eduqas Alevel RS Ethics 1F Emotivism

what is cognitive

proposition and measurable about the world or reality which can be shown to be either true or false, the statement became objective (naturalism demonstrates this through appearing to the natural world, intuition demonstrates through appealing to intuition, certainty in morality)

what is non cognitive

statements which contain no objective truths about the world, instead they are value judgements. Emotive responses and opinions

Emotivism (A.J. Ayer)

No way of knowing what is right and wrong; all ethical statements are expressions of emotion and meaningless ("boo/hooray" theory) Ethical language expresses emotions, and these expressions attempt to influence the emotions of others.

What is logical positivism?

a scientific approach that attempts to measure "truth" or real phenomena through methods of numbers and statistical analyses. It is set out to give a criteria to separate the meaningful (take more seriously, lead to knowledge and truth) from the meaningless (take less seriously, no knowledge, or truth)

what are the two sides to Hume's Fork

1. analytical (true or false by definition, deductive and apriori, don't require experience)

2. synthetic (true or false by empirical means, inductive, and a posterori, true through experience such as she is wearing a blue top)

what are the 5 steps of emotivism

1. moral terms are non cognitive

2. boo - hurrah theory

3. links to logical positivism

4. an expression of joy or pain and persuasiveness

5. emotivism, not subjectivism

moral terms are non cognitive

"I am not making any factual statement about my own state of mind" - mind is not a fact it is a statement.

Emotivism is an example of a non cognitive theory. A non cognitivist theory of ethics implies that ethical statements are neither true nor false they lack truth values. Ayer rejects Moore's and Prichard's assertion that there is some sort of universal innate sense of good or bad. For something to have intrinsic value is a matter of pure subjectivity (linked too much to nature and nurture there is no way that we all share the same ideals and values)

EXAMPLE:

1. I dislike Mrs Brown's Boys

2. Mrs Brown's Boys, boo!

they are slightly different. 1. is the proposition that reports a feeling (demonstrate a behaviour and can be true or false as it is a report on what you have) 2. Expresses a feeling, it is not something we could say to be true or false.

What is Boo/Hurrah theory?

it explains why people disagree so much about ethics. We don't disagree this much about where the Olympics is held because we can verify it and where we say the Olympics is to be held is not an expression of our feelings so we are not attached to it. We have no emotional link, no need for it be wrong or right like we need genocide to be wrong, we want it to be wrong

Moral statements are no more than expressions of emotions, making moral statements is just saying boo or hurrah. Ayer claimed that ethical statements are no more than expressions of our own personal experiences.

When we say stealing is bad it is our own personal opinion, we don't like stealing, we could express this as boo to stealing. the terms good and bad are expressions of our own personal experience or disapproval towards something. They link to our behaviour.

links to logical positivism

Ayer classified ethical statements into 4 categories.

1. definitions of ethical terms or judgements about these definitions - the only kind of ethical philosophy possible, things like good means making the most people happy

2. phenomena of moral experiences and their cause - this job of sociology and psychology. It is descriptive ethics the. behaviour we witness in people

3. exhortations of moral virtue - the commands to provoke people into action. Saying 'stealing is wrong', not propositions so not appropriate for philosophy or science

4.ethical judgements - unclear what these are but they are normative (ought to) and so they are not definitions and so should be ignored by science and philosophy

an expression of joy or pain and persuasiveness

ethical terms are not empirical facts:

- there is nothing self contradictory about saying that an action that makes me happy is bad (having an affair) you would say that this is bad due to the effect that this has on other people but it makes the self happy so it ’should’ be allowed

- there is nothing self contradictory about saying an action my society approves of is a bad action (having an abortion), what is right or wrong is subjective and is built into our emotion based on nature and nurture

Instead Ayer says that ethical terms are made to express joy or pain (emotion) Ethical proportions are pseudo concepts (not actual concepts as you cannot measure them or take them apart) They are treated as a concept but cannot be empirically verified. Ethical judgment are pure expressions of feeling and so do not come under truth or falsehood.

They are used more as persuasive techniques

1. it is good to tell the truth

2. you ought to tell the truth

3. it is our duty to tell the truth

- they are progressively more hard hitting so will have different outcomes

emotivism, not subjectivism

1.

subjectivism: ethical statements are non empirical propositions about how one feels

emotivism: ethical statements aren't proportions as they can't be proven true one feels, They are statements of feeling not how you feel, these are not verifiable.

e.g I am bored or sigh. You feel that murder is wrong, subjectivism, focus is the feeling rather than morality.

2.

Subjectivism: moral statements are just a report of how you feel, so you can never be wrong and nothing can be proven and disagreement can never be had

emotivism: ethical statements both show an emotional response but also aim to persuade even once the maters of fact have been established.

when this comes with the ability disagree as a moral statement is much more than a basic report on how one feels in that situation. You are making statements without feelings involved then it can be ethical and measured and disagreed.

what are the challenges to emotivism

1. no moral principles can be established

2. ethical debate becomes a pointless activity

3. there is no universal agreement that some actions are wrong

challenge: no moral principle can be established

- dismiss all of normative ethics like natural law, situation ethics and utilitarianism

- this is because emotivism accepts that all moral statements are meaningless

- this would have potential to leave moral agents guides with no sense of moral guide

- so how do you know anything about morality, there is no underlying principle

- James Rachels says that it makes moral debate no more than hot hair. Emotivism is reductionist in nature and down plays moral judgment. Emotivism is being pushy.

- Hepburn says it is reductionist because emotion is void of reason, there is another reason behind it which is the opposite to this which is where you go off and use genuine thinking which then informs your moral thinking

challenge: Ethical debate becomes a pointless activity

Emotivism does to allow for moral debate. This is because this argument is basically stating that if two people have different emotions about whether an action is good or bad, then they both must right. Such as someone saying that sealing is good and someone saying that it basically means that they are both right because it is how we feel emotionally there is no grounds for moral activity or debate

* Simply argued to persuade you - manipulate you into agreeing with them such as adverts persuading you to do something or not but ethics is more than that.

challenge: There is no universal agreement that some actions are wrong

- emotivism does not give morality a self of absolutes e.g murder is wrong. This seems to go against moral agents common sense view of ethics.

- Mel Thompson stated 'you cannot reduce morality to a set of cheers and boos'

- Emotivism says that there are no moral actions that are objectively wrong

- doesn't account to why people change their mind over moral issues or now they come to their decision in the first place

what are the strengths of emotivism

- emotivism can explain the diversity of moral opinion that we see across society. It does not say what is right or wrong and explains why there are discrepancies across society in moral beliefs.

- we can also measure emotions by looking at the biological foundations

- Intuitionism is just based on gut feelings and nothing more at least emotion has some value