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

What is meant by meta-ethics?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

January 2002 Foundation a) What is meant by meta-ethics Ethics is the study of moral standards and conduct. For this reason, the study of ethics is also often called "moral philosophy," meaning "What is good?" "What is bad" etc. However, Meta-ethics is the study of this moral language and of what different people mean when they use ethical terminology. There are many accepted schools of thought that give definitions of ethical language. Meta-ethics is the study of how these theories account for moral language. Take, for example, Ethical Naturalism; this theory takes it origins from the teachings of Aristotle. Aristotle believed that everything in the universe has a purpose, which he called its 'final cause,' for which it has been designed. In fulfilling this purpose things can achieve 'goodness.' From this Ethical naturalists believe that 'good' can be explained in terms of features of the natural world. However, ethical non-naturalists believe that you cannot determine goodness in terms of natural phenomena. They believe that goodness is simply a term we use to describe something, not something which can be discovered within the nature of something. ...read more.

Middle

wall he has painted is purple not yellow and so moral judgements will be self evident in different ways to other people.) Logical positivists on the other hand, believe moral language to be non-cognitive, that is to say that it does not give any information but merely expresses the emotions or feelings of the person using it. Two approaches sprung from this branch of thought: Emotivism and prescriptivism. Emotivists believe that by saying something is 'good' you are saying that you approve of it, and in saying something is bad, you disapprove of it. Therefore, there can be no factual evidence for, or to the contrary of moral judgements as they are merely expressions of opinion and are based on personal values, not facts. Prescriptivists take this one step further by arguing that by saying that something is 'good' you are not only saying that you approve of it, but you are prescribing this course of action to everyone in this particular situation. This theory was suggested by R.M Hare in his book The language of Morals [1952]. ...read more.

Conclusion

Now most non-religious people would accept that we gain our morality from our up bringing and our culture. From childhood, we our taught what is considered to be right and wrong in our society. Therefore, someone on one side of the world can grow up thinking that cannibalism is wrong, and another in a different part of the world can think it is right. Therefore, what is "good" varies around the globe. Another school of thought that sprung from Logical Positivism believes that no one can ever know what is good, as moral language is pure an expression of emotions or feelings at a particular time. This is called Emotivism. Therefore, you can replace "x is good" with "I approve of x". Now the likelihood of the entire world approving of one thing is extremely slim. Religious people, however, believe that our conscience is God's voice telling us what to do and would argue that God does tell everyone the same thing but some people choose to ignore it. So a Christian standpoint may agree with the title statement and say that "Everyone knows what is good, but everyone does not obey." Charlie Matthews 12CAS 05/05/2007 1 of 2 ...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. What is meant by Meta Ethics? Meta ethics helps to establish what constitutes ...

    The final theory is prescriptivism. The scholar associated with this R.M. Hare. He argued that moral statements do not just express a feeling but recommend that something should be done as well. This is a way of dealing with ethical language because it does not just say that the statement

  2. Explain and discuss the four major theories of meta-ethics; Naturalism, Emotivism, Intuitionism and Prescriptivism.

    Intuitionism, on the other hand, rejects the idea of naturalism, and instead accepts the idea that moral facts are based on, and are a result of our own intuition. Intuitionists like Moore, believe that moral judgement cannot be proved empirically and that scientific observation and analysis cannot verify it, and also that moral judgement exists in human intuition.

  1. Business Ethics

    Independence, on the other hand, refers to the need for accountants to have an attitude and exhibit exemplary behavior such as not to compromise their professionalism in carrying out their duties.

  2. What is Meta-ethics?

    Prescriptivism is another viewpoint which is related to emotivism. It was developed by R.M Hare, and he agreed with Ayer; that moral statements are just expressions of our feelings towards certain issues. But Hare went further that Ayer. He believed that when we make moral statements, we are not just expressing our opinions; we are prescribing them to other people.

  1. Religious Ethics are not the best approach to environmental ethics'. Discuss.

    He said "Human ecology is deeply conditioned by beliefs about our nature and destiny - that is, by religion". He develops this suggesting that our destruction and damage to the environment can be traced to the technological advances of the industrial revolution and the enlightenment period which are a result

  2. Examine Different Ways In Which the Word "Good" is Used In Meta-Ethics

    If somebody kills your mother; you are hardly going to say to him, "although I disapprove of what you did, I accept you that did what you believed in, and thus you are as right as I am". It is simply ridiculous; because unlike logical positivism, which says that nothing

  1. Discuss some of the issues raised in Meta-Ethics. How convincing is the view that, ...

    Ethics and ethical language, the study of which 'Meta-Ethics' is part, can be split into three distinct branches: descriptive, normative and meta-ethical. On the one hand, descriptive ethics describes the way we live and the moral choices we happen to make.

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

    Because we cannot see or hear 'goodness', it is an abstract concept, which cannot be experienced in its pure form through the senses. We may be able to point to examples of good things, but we cannot actually understand what 'goodness' is.

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