Moral facts are
natural facts,
they translate
without loss of
meaning
Natural facts are
anything you
can observe in
the world
Type of ethical
cognitivism-
ethical language
presents facts
about reality
Express
ethical views
about how
the world is
As it aims to
describe the
world it can be
true or false
Direction of fit- Anscombe-
desires try to make the world
match the idea so the
direction of fit is world to
word. Beliefs try to match the
idea to the world so the
direction of fit is word to
world
Arguments for
We think we can
make mistakes
about morality
Morality feels like
a demand from
the outside
Many people
believe in
moral
progress
Moral realism-
there are objective
moral facts and
properties
Things are right
or wrong
independent of
our opinion
E.g. Utilitarianism,
Virtue Ethics
F H Bradley
Universal
good
Rejects the
individualism of
utilitarianisms
Society is
central to
ethics
We learn our moral
obligations from our
community and o duty
is derived from that
soceity
We become moral be
identifying and
conforming to the
norms of our society
If you stand
against, or
question society
you are
immoral!
Stations and duties
become one with
the good will by
accepting your
stations and
duties
The individual
mind acts
according to
the will of the
infinite mind
Personal
freedoms are
sacrificed for
the collective
good will
"To be moral is to
live in accordance
with the moral
tradition of ones
country"
Arguments Against
The is/ought gap
There is a gap
between facts
and values
E.g. a child is sad so we
ought to give her a
lollypop. But why? Its
implying we care that
she is sad but we are
not morally obliged to
G.E.Moore,
The
Naturalistic
Fallacy
A theory that translates
ethical statements into
non ethical statements
commits the naturalistic
fallacy
Moral facts
exist but
they are
not natural
G.E.Moore, The
Open Question
Argument
Used to prove that facts don't = values
You can agree all
the facts but still
meaningfully ask is
it good
BUT does it just show
what more thinks is
not good by leaving an
open question?
Masked man argument
Ethical Non- Naturalism
Moral properties can't
be natural properties
goodness
is an
analysable
property
E.g. you can give a definition of
a horse because it has many
different proprieties and
qualities all of which you can
enumerate
When you
have reduced
a horse to its
simplest term
you can no
longer define
that term
Good doesn't
have a
definition
because it is
simple and has
no parts
"good is
incapable of
any definition"
E.g. like colours, you can't explain
it to someone who hasn't seen it
but colours are natural property
whereas good is a non natural
property
Good isn't part of
science its part of
reality
The property of
something isn't
the effect
G.E.Moore
Good can't be meaningless
because then there wouldn't be
such a thing as ethics which is
unrealistic
You can use the
open question
argument to
dispute the fact
that good is a
complex term
about which there
is disagreement
Intuitionism
Moral
intuitions are
not infallable
We have to work
out between true
and false
intuitions
Intuitionist
about the ends
we seek not
the means by
which we
reach them
BUT
Doesn't explain
peoples
differing
intuitions
Cultural influence
We know what is
right thorough
intuition not
observation