Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

PHILOSOPHY 2 - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Valid
      - Sound
    - - -
- - - - Moral Facts/ Properties can be reduced/identical to natural facts/properties
      - Utilitarianism - Goodness = Pleasure (Psychological/Natural Process)
      - Aristotelian Virtue Ethics - Goodness = Someone/thing fulfilling it's function
    - - Moral facts not found in nature/not reducible/observable in natural world
        
        Therefore there is *nothing which is identical to 'good'
        
        Goodness is simple and indefinable -moral naturalism is wrong
      - Moore's open question
        
        The question "is X Good?" (where X is anything observable) is an open question as no guarantee of a definitive answer (ie: "is pleasure good?" yes and no and sometimes at different times
      - Naturalistic Fallacy
        
        'Any property is reducible to goodness' - self contradicting
      - Moore was an 'intuitionist' - Moral Realist - Cognitivist - Non Naturalist - Can identify what is good through moral sense
    - - Hume
        
        1. Hume's Fork
        
        moral judgements not relations of ideas or matters of fact
        
        Therefore moral judgements are not statements that count as knowledge but instead are opinioins
        
        2. Is-Ought Gap/Hume's Law
        
        Cannot derive an 'ought' (Moral Judgement) from an 'is' (fact/belief)
        
        ie: "the way things are, is the way things should be"
        
        3. Beliefs can't motivate us
        
        not motivated by facts
        
        are motivated by feelings/judgements/opinions
        
        moral judgements = not beliefs
        
        Moral judgements are not beliefs
        
        Belief = a view held, that is truth apt
      - Ayer
        
        Verification
        
        Statement is only meaningful (truth-apt/describe reality) if it is verifiable
        
        Analytically- tautology/true by definition
        or
        
        Empirically - sense experience/observation
        
        ie: "Lying is wrong" not verifiable
        
        Moral Statements not verifiable
        
        Therefore moral statements not meaningful - this does not mean they are pointless, they are simply not truth-apt
      - Mackie
        
        1. Argument from Relativity
        
        Metaphysically - if Moral Realism true
        
        there would need to be physical objects existing in nature that motivate moral judgements
        
        2. Argument from Queerness
        
        Epistemologically - if Moral Realism true...
        
        there would need to be a Queer/Strange way of accessing knowledge of moral facts
- - - - Convincing?
    - - Compare paragraphs
        
        i.e. "this is more convincing than the last paragraph as it is commensurable with science..."
    - - Comment on importance of an argument/objection to your overall 'movement' of the essay