Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

ETHICS: META-ETHICAL APPROACHES - INTUITIONISM, EMOTIVISM (AO1) - Coggle…

- - - - this part refers to non-natural property - sui generis (unique)
  - - - 1) what is intrinsically good/ valuable?
        
        answered through intuition, cannot be proved
      - 2) what kind of action ought i to perform?
        
        requires proof, understood through knowledge of good, w/ analysis of consequences
  - - - obvious truths - relative to individual, not obvious to everyone
      - self-evident truths - objective, don't need to be proven as it has its own evidence
  - - - guarding against considering something to be good as it can be used as a tool to achieve something else - only intrinsically good if it is independent of anything else
      - guarding against assuming only one feature makes something good - MOORE believes there are many goods
  - - - TWO WAYS OF THINKING: GENERAL & MORAL
        
        PRICHARD points out its agent to engage in general thinking so they're aware of the full story to understand preliminaries (facts that will help the intuition be formed
        
        general thinking is thinking required in matters of philosophy + science, enabling a person to use reasoning to discover what's true
        
        general thinking will not bring a person to conclude that they have duty to act a certain way, but they can realise the entire picture, actions + relationships
        
        moral thinking, however, is recognition of an obligation arising from the unreflective consciousness (the awareness in the mind of moral obligations, independent of general thinking)
        
        moral thinking is derived from intuitive knowledge which we are certain of, which cannot be derived from empirical evidence + reasoning
        
        w/o application of moral thinking, we would end up doubting our moral duty
        
        by using general thinking, an agent can appreciate their obligation directly within their moral thinking
- - - - expression of feeling
      - attempt to evoke a response
  - - - moral statements are an exclamation, and is why the theory is also known as the 'boo hurrah theory'
      - demonstration of moral language presents connection between moral statement judgement and sayer's behaviour
      - negative expressions to an action would show they would resist said action due to their negative feelings about it
      - it would be inconsistent if they perform behaviours they feel negatively about
  - - - definitions of ethical terms/ judgements about legitimacy of definitions
        
        ayer thinks the only ethical philosophy possible is meta ethics
      - phenomena of moral experience + causes
        
        psych., socio. (descriptive ethics); behaviour we witness in people/ society
      - exhortations to moral virtue
        
        commands to provoke action; not subjects for philosophy/ science
      - ethical judgements
        
        unclear, according to Ayer; not definitions, not subject of any philosophy
  - - - ayer's issues with naturalism - their way of defining ethical terms is wrong; it isn't self-contradictory to say actions that create happiness can be bad
      - ayer's issues with intuitionism - it gives no method for deciding between conflicting intuitions, so it wouldn't be suitable to test the validity of moral propositions
      - ayer does agree with intuitionists on fundamental ethical concepts being unanalysable as they have no criteria to be tested for validity
        
        this is because they are pseudo-concepts - having the appearance of a concept, but have no objective validity
      - if a statement has nothing that proves if it's true or false, there is no objective validity
      - arguments between moral agents aren't based on fact; this is just expression (emoting), and applies to all ethical terminology
      - terms contain empirical facts, but ethical judgements remain purely emotive
    - - ayer mentions there is further function to ethical judgements, which is to inspire others to feel the same way + influence
      - statements have different levels of persuasive intensity depending on terms used
      - meaning of 'good' differs to meanings of 'ought' or 'duty', as it provokes different level of response
  - - - subjectivists see ethical statements as non-empirical proposals about how one is feeling. ayer says if they were propositions, then they could be proven true or false. a challenge can't be made without a proposition. ayer does mention that statements about feelings and statements of feeling sounding similar (e.g., saying you're bored, looking bored, sighing out of boredom)
      - challenge to goodness/ badness of an action determining what a person feels. emotivism denies ethical judgements having validity, so it doesn't try to suggest that feelings are enough to base an ethical judgement on