• 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. 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.

  2. Business Ethics

    Higgs and Kapelianis (1999) concurred and suggested that the need to satisfy multiple interest groups do indeed create ethical conflicts amongst accountants. This may be due to the fact that it is difficult to reconcile and therefore satisfy the differing needs and interests of all parties involved.

  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. What is meant by Meta Ethics? Meta ethics helps to establish what constitutes ...

    Finally there are meaningless statements which unlike the term suggests are not meaningless but are statements which cannot be tested. These are often statements of opinion which cannot be proved or disproved therefore they do not say anything about moral ethics, but only show that of emotivism.

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

    is right or wrong, we just express our opinions with these words, emotivism takes it a step further by saying that everybody is right, and if you approve in what you are doing, then it is consequently "good", regardless of what it is you are actually doing.

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

    Naturally, it could be argued that 'good' actions add to the well-being of all concerned; but, again, 'good' actions depend very much on individual preference and one's individual idea of 'good'. The puzzle, then, of how to define 'good' has intrigued philosophers for thousands of years.

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

    This proves that ethics is not just about opinions but also consists of certain fact that can no way can be proved wrong for example it is always wrong to drown a four year old girl. But on the other hand it also agrees with the statements as is only giving recommendations on the way people should act.

  2. Examine what is meant by situation ethics

    Another one of Fletchers arguments was that Christians are meant to love and care for each other and God is also portrayed to be all-loving. As this is the case for Christians shouldn't morality also be based around this theory 'to do the most loving thing'?

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