DIALOGUE Meta Ethics Article

Page 1: Understanding Meta-Ethics

  • Definition of Ethics: A sub-branch of philosophy that considers moral obligations, actions, and principles.

  • Normative Ethics: Examines what actions are required, permitted, or forbidden.

  • Applied Ethics: Addresses specific moral issues or problems.

  • Meta-Ethics: A second-order inquiry into the nature of ethical activity, focusing on what we do when making moral judgments and engaging in moral arguments.

Fundamental Questions of Meta-Ethics

  • What are the meanings of moral terms?

  • What mental states are involved in accepting moral claims?

  • Is there a moral reality? What are moral properties and facts?

  • Can ethical knowledge be obtained?

Areas of Concern within Meta-Ethics

  • Semantics of Moral Language: Meaning and function of moral terms; truth conditions.

  • Psychology of Morality: Relationship between beliefs, desires, and actions in moral claims.

  • Metaphysics of Morality: Existence and nature of moral properties and facts.

  • Epistemology of Morality: Justification and knowledge in moral claims.

Page 2: Meta-Ethical Positions

  • Variety of Responses: Different combinations of responses create complex meta-ethical positions.

Realism vs. Anti-Realism

  • Realism: There are moral facts and propositions whose truth is independent of human judgments.

  • Anti-Realism: Denies the existence of moral facts independent of human judgments.

Naturalism vs. Non-Naturalism

  • Naturalism: Moral properties are identical to natural properties.

  • Non-Naturalism: Moral properties are sui generis and of a special kind.

Page 3: Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism

  • Cognitivism: Moral judgements express beliefs that can be true or false.

  • Non-Cognitivism: Moral judgements express attitudes, not beliefs; they are not truth-apt.

Implications of Cognitivism and Non-Cognitivism

  • Cognitivists view moral claims as similar to factual claims.

  • Non-cognitivists argue moral claims are expressions of emotions or desires.

Page 4: The Argument from Moral Psychology

  • Motivational Internalism: There is a connection between moral judgments and motivation.

  • According to Hume, motivations derive from pairs of beliefs and desires.

  • Challenges to Cognitivism: If moral judgments express beliefs, they should also be tied to desires, which is questioned.

What Non-Cognitivists Propose

  • Non-cognitivism suggests moral judgments are non-descriptive and project attitudes.

  • Varieties include emotivism and prescriptivism.

Page 5: Moral Realism

  • Core Claims of Moral Realism:

    • Moral judgements describe moral facts that exist independently.

    • Successful moral judgments state true moral propositions.

Justifications for Moral Realism

  • Ordinary moral practices reflect realist assumptions.

  • Examples:

    • Declarative nature of moral discourse.

    • The concept of moral knowledge.

    • Consistency in moral judgments across situations.

Page 6: The Naturalistic Fallacy and the Open Question Argument

  • G. E. Moore's Contribution: The distinction between properties (goodness) and instances of good things.

  • Open Question Argument: Questions about goodness are always open despite definitions.

  • Naturalistic Fallacy: Misunderstanding that moral properties can be defined by natural phenomena.

Page 7: Alternatives to Moral Realism

  • Expressivism: Denies moral judgments describe the world.

  • Error-Theory: Accepts that moral judgments aim to describe, but claims they are always false.

  • Moral Scepticism: Nihilism and quietism as alternatives.

Page 8: Understanding Expressivism

  • Core Concepts: Moral judgments express attitudes, not beliefs.

  • Varieties of Expressivism include emotivism and quasi-realism.

  • Language serves various functions besides description, impacting semantics.

Page 9: Emotivism Explained

  • A. J. Ayer & C. L. Stevenson: Defenders of emotivism arguing moral statements express emotional responses.

  • Verificationalist Argument: Moral statements cannot be true or false as they are not verifiable.

  • Critique of Ayer's Position: Challenges on meaningfulness and function of moral language.

  • Arguments for Emotivism: Focused on internalism, metaphysical simplicity, and semantic openness.