619896
Meta-ethics
- Examines the meaning
of ethical language
- 20th century - occupied almost totally
(in 'analytic' anglophone philosophy)
with analysis of language →
dominated ethical discussion of the
detriment of practical questions
- Cognitivists - ethical language
is meaningful, objective, can
be true or false and is factual
- Non-cognitivists - ethical
language is non-descriptive,
meaningless, subjective and
cannot be true or false
- F.H. Bradley: Ethical
Naturalism (Cognitivists)
- Ethical statements are the same as
non-ethical statements - factual and can be
verified or falsified by looking at evidence
e.g. Martin Luther was a good man → led the
African-Americans out of racial segregation
- Example: 'rough' or
'smooth' ≈ 'good' or 'bad'
- Example: 'rough' or
'smooth' ≈ 'good' or 'bad'
- Ethical statements
can be verified through
empirical observation
- Ethical statements can be drawn
from non-ethical, natural statements
e.g. abortion ends the life of a
foetus therefore abortion is wrong
- We observe the world around
us and create moral theories
to fit our observations
- Evaluation
- - G.E. Moore - 'naturalistic fallacy' → cannot
claim that moral statements can be verified or
falsified using evidence - based his argument
on Hume's is-ought (fact-moral judgement)
- - G.E. Moore - 'naturalistic fallacy' → cannot
claim that moral statements can be verified or
falsified using evidence - based his argument
on Hume's is-ought (fact-moral judgement)
- Ethical statements are the same as
non-ethical statements - factual and can be
verified or falsified by looking at evidence
e.g. Martin Luther was a good man → led the
African-Americans out of racial segregation
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.