Ethical Naturalism

Key Terms:

Meta-Ethics: From Greek meta meaning above and beyond. The study of the meanings of ethical concepts

Normative ethics: Theories of ethics that give advice on how we ought to behave

Naturalism: The idea that moral values can be correctly defined by observation of the natural world

Moral realism: The belief that right and wrong actually exist; they are real properties

Cognitivism: The belief that moral statements are subject to being either true or false

Key Quotations:

‘What he has to do depends on what his place is, what his function is, and that all comes from his station in the organism’ - Bradley, Ethical Studies

What is ethical naturalism?

Ethical naturalism believes that moral truths can be discovered by observation of the world. What is right and wrong can be established by looking at the world around us. It is a moral realist theory (believing that moral facts or truths actually exist) and is also cognitivist, believing that statements made about right and wrong are subject to being either true or false. Naturalists believe that ethical terms are meaningful.

Versions of Ethical Naturalism

There are diferent versions of ethical naturalism, but it is worth restating that the key feature discovered by in common is the idea that moral values be defined and discovered by looking at some aspect of the world around us. They are known empirically.

  1. Aquinas (1224-1274). (Natural Law) would hold to a theological naturalism. The world has a God-given order built into it Moral values can be worked out by understanding our God-given purpose and observing the natural order.

  2. The British philosopher F.H. Bradley (1846-1924) argued that it is possible to understand our moral duties by observing our position or station in life. Although to some extent this is outdated and has a hint of Victorian class divisions, it could be argued that certain roles, for example, teacher, nurse, mother or brother, do seem to have certain duties or moral values attached to them.

  3. Utilitarian thinkers, such as Bentham (1748-1832) and Mill (1806-1873), argue that we can discover right and wrong by discovering what actions lead to pleasure or pain. By observing that stabbing someone causes them pain, we can infer that this action is wrong.

Naturalism and Absolutism

Ethical naturalism links very strongly with the idea of absolutism; however, they are not necessarily the same thing. One way of arguing for ethical naturalism is to use the thinking of Natural Law; the moral values that we discover when we consider purpose do indeed create absolute rules. Equally, there could be a utilitarian form of naturalism. However, if a thinker believes that right and wrong are linked to pleasure and pain, there may be more relative moral truths discovered.

An objection to naturalism

One objection to naturalism has its origins in the writings of David Hume and is known as the fact-value distinction or 'is-ought' problem.

When we consider an action such as a murder we can describe the facts empirically — using statements involving the word 'is' - but we then move towards moral claims involving ought' and ought not'. Hume suggests that no matter how closely we examine the situation itself we will not be able to empirically see or hear the 'wrongness' of such an action.