Emotivism came about from the theory of logical positivism. This is the view that only those things that can be tested are meaningful. For example … The theory says roughly says that any genuine truth claim must be able to be tested by sense experience. Since moral judgments can't be tested by sense experience, they aren't genuine truth claims. So moral judgments only express feelings. Thus logical positivism leads to Emotivism.
Emotivism is also known as the boo/hurrah theory in which we say boo to bad things e.g. poverty and illness, but hurrah to the good things e.g. giving to charity, this idea simply sums up the idea of emotivism.
A.J Ayer was a philosopher of mind and logic, he said that meaningful statements have to be verified, whether this be synthetically or analytically, these are Ayers two types of thinking.
Synthetic statements determine the truth or falsity of the statement and it is determined by checking the facts, either way. An example of this is the battle of Hastings took place in 1066, we know this is a proven fact as there are records and can be traced back.
Analytical statements is the truth or falsity of the statement and it can be determined simply by understanding An example of this is all people are born of a woman, this is fact we do not need to trace back to be proven correct.
C. L. Stevenson also gave an interpretation of emotivism; he said that ethical statements are attitudes based on beliefs about the world and that they are attempts to influence the views of others, these views are subject to opinion. Stevenson said that the purpose of a moral statement was to persuade someone of the rightness or wrongness of an action. He said that when we talk about moral issues we express approval or disapproval. He also said that moral statements are not expressions of emotion but were based on deep beliefs. He believed that moral statements are the result of subjective opinion.
Ethical statements have no truth and are not variable, there are no facts which back up if ethical statements are true or false, so they are meaningless.
Moral propositions are still propositions but they are only true or false in relation to the person speaking
The emotive theory would appear to be proposing that moral judgements lie between pure descriptions and pure exclamations.
It is a known fact that scholars base there knowledge and reasoning on pure facts that can be traced an d proved rather than belief on unproven facts, therefore I think that scholars would disagree with the emotivism idea, as it cannot be proven.