• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Explain what scholars mean when they say that ethical statements are no more than expression of opinions.

Extracts from this document...


Explain what scholars mean when they say that ethical statements are no more than expression of opinions. (33) Before this question can be answered, terms such as meta- ethics and theories associated with this topic must be explained to ensure that all the terms are understood in the correct way. Meta- Ethics explores the meaning and function of moral language. Instead of looking at whether abortion is right or wrong, meta- ethics looks at methods to use and how to approach the issue. Meta- ethics is important because if there is 'no agreement about the meaning of ethical language (some argue that it has no real meaning at all), then ethical debate is pointless and will never achieve anything.'(1) Meta- ethics looks at questions like, What, if anything, do we mean when we use words such as 'good' or 'bad, 'right' or 'wrong?' When we use these words, what are we doing? Are we expressing our approval? And do we all mean the same when we say something is good? This is harder to answer than it first appears. A meta- ethical theory, unlike a normative ethical theory, does not contain any ethical evaluations. Some of the approaches used are divided into cognitivist and non- cognitivist views. Cognitivist views hold the opinion that moral statements are about facts, things that are true or false. ...read more.


(6) Moral Skepticism: holds the view that ethical statements are generally false. 'We can not sufficiently justify any ethical claims, and therefore maintain doubt about whether they are true or false.' (5) So when scholars say ethical statements are no more than expressions of opinions they could be correct, but at the same time they could be erroneous. Moral subjectivism would back up the claim that ethical statements are expressions of opinion because subjectivism states that things are true or false dependant upon the individual. So if person X thinks abortion is wrong, then that's their opinion, and if person Y thinks abortion is justifiable, then it's their opinion so it is also correct. So therefore, ethical statements are opinions based upon the individual and therefore, opinions would differ from place to place. On the other hand, ethical naturalism says that it is possible to establish moral facts, so therefore, ethical statements must be more than opinions otherwise it would not be possible to determine this. Naturalism is well presented in the works of Mill. G.E.Moore argues that 'ethical naturalism makes a mistake, and that moral statements cannot be verified simply by looking at the evidence available.' (1) This mistake is known as the 'Naturalistic Fallacy.' Non- cognitivism (emotivism) ...read more.


If not, then ethical statements could be like expressions of feelings, as everyone's would be different. Moore believed that it is still possible for us to decide whether moral statement is true or false, even if we cannot use our powers of observation to give us the answers. According to Moore, we cannot use our five senses to determine whether something's right or wrong, but use our 'moral intuition.' 'There is no way that we can explain yellow, especially to someone who has never seen it, and if we try to say what it is like, we end up giving examples of yellow things rather than defining yellow itself; but we still know what's yellow when we see it.' (1) It could be said that it is just not a matter of opinion, but something that we can be certain about. In conclusion, I think ethical statements are more than just matters of opinion and I think certain theories within this, for example emotivism, takes away the value ethical statements should bare. Although certain theories like intuitionism have some truth, it is hard to pin point the 'exact truth' as there are so many different opinions and theories to consider. Therefore, it could be considered ethical statements are mere expressions of opinion, but as intuitionism says, there are objective moral principles and we have an intuitive awareness of moral truths, although sometimes these differ from culture to culture. Francesca Ricci. Theology Essay (Ethics) 21st October, 2003. Meta- Ethics. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Practical Questions section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Practical Questions essays

  1. Emotivism - Explain what scholars mean when they say that ethical statements are no ...

    He says that ethical statements cannot be fact because people have disagreeing "opinions" over them. For example, one person may agree that abortion is right while the other may totally disagree.

  2. Explain what scholars mean when they say that ethical statements are no more than ...

    It is possible to test these propositions: For example 'aliens have just landed in London' is a synthetic proposition, because we could prove this statement by going to London and seeing the aliens with our own eyes. Therefore, we can say that 'a posteriori' propositions are scientifically or empirically testable.

  1. The Ethical Debate Concerning Cloning.

    He sees the possibility for good in cloning and believes that the idea has not been carefully thought out. Wilson begins by presenting two philosophical arguments against cloning. The first objection to cloning is that it violates God's will. Wilson rejects this argument on the basis that IVF also creates embryos outside of the female body.

  2. Explain why there maybe problems about the meaning of ethical language

    set of duties which exist in their own right, and can be uncovered through human reason, philosophers such as Kant believe this to be the case. Therefore, if people interpret words in differing ways when people can have a conversation or read books they may misinterpret the meaning of ethical language.

  1. Moral statements are simply covert descriptions of emotions or recommendations for action. Discuss this ...

    A naturalist will draw conclusions from non-ethical statements, for example The war on Iraq ended human life therefore it was wrong. Absolutist also proves that this statement is untrue. Absolutists believe that there is a moral value that is always true in all situations and for all people.

  2. How are religious and ethical principles used in the abortion debate?

    Those who are rational and faithful would find five primary precepts; basic moral commands which God has embedded in nature: to preserve life, reproduce, educate, live in society, and worship God. The first of these to protect and preserve human life, is widely used to argue that killing is intrinsically

  1. With reference to the topic of abortion , examine and comment on the controversies, ...

    They go further in this argument by pointing out that childbearing has been a form of slavery men have used to ensure their dominance over women. Others would argue that it is better to fight for self-determination than to exist as a slave.

  2. Does the "War on Terror" mean the just war doctrine is dead?

    Since 1998, he has prevented the United Nations to inspect his facilities for weapons production, therefore he may be close to acquiring those weapons. What this shows is that the threat is not clear nor imminent, there is no solid evidence to prove there is any weapons of mass destruction and it is entirely based on circumstantial evidence.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work