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

Explain why there maybe problems about the meaning of ethical language

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Explain why there maybe problems about the meaning of ethical language. (12) Discuss possible solutions to these problems. (8) Ethical language uses words, terms and phrases from normal language, but they normally do not have the same meaning. Words such as; 'good' have a variety of meanings in the normal everyday use, but also have several different meanings when used in moral philosophy. For example, the dictionary gives the following definitions of the word good; 'having the right or desired qualities, satisfactory, adequate, efficient, competent, reliable, strong, kind, benevolent, morally excellent, virtuous, charitable, well-behaved, enjoyable, agreeable, thorough, considerable.' Then 'good' can be used to mean the following in moral philosophy; an inherent quality which is widely beneficial, the opposite of bad or evil, something one or more persons approves of, useful in that the good action/concept/attitude enriches human life, or God-like or what God wants. The same problem applies to many other words within the English language, however is best illustrated by the word 'good'. ...read more.

Middle

For example, if a woman desperately wanted children but this was impossible except through fertility treatment, many would say that she ought to be offered fertility treatment. In this case the 'is' statement is; a marries woman wants a child, and the 'ought' statement is; she should be offered IVF. G E Moore would argue that the 'ought' statement does not logically follow from the 'is' statement, but there has to be an intermediate statement, however this would also be an 'ought; statement. JR Searle, argues that you can move from an 'is' to an 'ought', his argument is as follows; Jones says, 'I promise to pay you $5 Smith, Jones has, therefore, offered to pay Smith $5, Jones has voluntarily put himself under obligation to pay Smith the money, Jones is, therefore, under obligation to pay, Jones ought to pay Smith $5. In this argument the first four statements are all 'is' statements, and the last is an 'ought' statement. ...read more.

Conclusion

Moreover, there is the Naturalistic Fallacy, which is the is-ought debate; whether it is possible to move from an 'is' statement to an 'ought' statement. Furthermore, according to some people some ethical statements are 'meaningless', it could be argued that this is because of the ethical language used. The only possible solution to there being room for misinterpretation of words because they have many different meanings, is to create new words which have there own specific definition which is agreed on by all. Or just to have agreed on definitions of all words used in ethical language such as 'good', however this is not likely to work. The problem of the naturalistic Fallacy for ethical language cannot be readily solved, the only possibility is, in my opinion, for it to be accepted by all moral philosophers that you cannot move form an 'is' to an 'ought'. The same applies for the 'meaningless' statements, I agree with the logical positivists and see statements which cannot be verified in any way as 'meaningless'. Thomas Taylor ...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. Religious Language cannot be proved, therefore it is meaningless

    individuals and communities, if a statement about God is understood to be true within a form of life then it should be seen as true, whether or not it corresponds with the state of affairs is irrelevant. Consequently when an anti-realists says a statement such as 'god exists' this means

  2. Analyse the arguments which philosophers use to claim that ethical language is not meaningful ...

    Ayer demonstrated that verification of ethical statements is impossible and therefore ethical language is meaningless. Analytically, it is impossible to verify a statement such as 'abortion is wrong' because there is no logical connection between abortion and wrong. Whereas it is contradictory to say 'all bachelors are unmarried women,' it is not contradictory to say 'abortion is not right.'

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

    However, this view could be criticised. People would argue that moral statements go much further than just expressing our own approval or disproval; they have a more justifiable basis than this. C.L.Stevenson argued this point by saying that ethical statements are expressions of attitude or opinion, but he went on to argue that these attitudes are

  2. The Teleological Argument

    Hume also criticises Paley's design qua purpose argument; he does not think that the analogy to compare with the universe and the watch. The universe is something that grows of its own accord rather than something made by hand. Furthermore, the stability and order is not the result of a

  1. The 21st century has raised more problems for equality than it has solved. Examine ...

    The Netherlands was the first country in the world to legalise gay marriage, in 2001 and in America the U.S. Supreme Court abolished all state sodomy laws in the year 2003. Today, the universal age of consent is 16 in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and on 2nd February

  2. Discuss the claim that ethical and religious language is meaningless.

    Philosophers such as A.J. Ayer, writing in Language, Truth and Logic and members of the Vienna Circle, wanted to be able to break down language into its simplest components. All meaningful propositions were divided into two categories, analytic and synthetic.

  1. "It is impossible to reconcile any kind of determinism with the concept of freewill." ...

    Soft determinism takes a moderate position between the two extremes of determinism, hard determinism and libertarianism. Soft determinists believe that human beings do control a significant portion of their behaviour, while they are limited in the choices they can make by lack of knowledge, quality of parenting, biological predispositions and economic circumstances.

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

    This began a debate on whether religious and moral language really was meaningful or not. If we take the example of proving the existence of God, logical positivists would say that because we cannot prove His existence using the senses, any discussion relating to religion, or belief is meaningless.

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