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

Explain how Meta-Ethics differs from Normative Ethics.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

1. Explain how Meta-Ethics differs from Normative Ethics Meta Ethics can also be called philosophical ethics and is a twentieth century concept. This section of ethics explores the meaning of moral language. The most common passage explored in meta-ethics is the meaning of the words; 'good, bad, right or wrong'. When deciding what a meta-ethical question is, its best to look for the use of those words. An example of a meta-ethical question would be, 'What do we mean when we say that euthanasia is wrong?' There are two main branches of meta-ethics. One being ethical non-naturalism (also known as intuitionism) and non-cognitivism (which is also know as emotivism). Normative Ethics was dominant up until the end of the nineteenth century, now it is commonly replaced by meta-ethics. The theory begins by establishing what things are good and what things are bad. It also decides how people ought to act and behave, as well as how a person makes moral choices. These choices are based on a person's culture or religion and form a traditional way of doing ethics. An example of a normative ethical question would be, 'Is Capital Punishment right?' There are two further branches of normative ethics; Deontological and Teleological. Deontological theories are concerned with the acts themselves, which are intrinsically right or wrong. ...read more.

Middle

He also argued that moral principles wouldn't be absolute. W.D Ross believed that duties should be judged on first appearances. Therefore when faced with a moral dilemma, the duties and obligations are apparent. These are called 'prima facie' duties. There are seven different first appearance duties; keeping promises, amendments made for harm done, gratitude, justice and self-improvement. When making a moral decision our intuition identifies the duties even though our actual isn't obvious. W.D Ross believed that things that are right to do and things that are good to do, differed depending on a person's intention or reason for doing it. He did allow a solution when a person's duties conflicted. He said that a personal nature of duty and a feeling of obligation to our parents, could overrule the need to provide greater good. The criticisms of intuitionism, changes corresponding to the people who have analysed the theory and developed it themselves. G.E. Moore declared many things about good and how it couldn't be defined but he never actually proved his case. H.A Pritchard's main weakness was that he didn't discriminate enough between the conclusions when our intuitions differ. Finally, W.D Ross doesn't seem to take into account the rights of people, even in life/death situations. People also argue that, who knows what is and isn't a 'prima facie', and how can people be sure that what W.D Ross says is correct. ...read more.

Conclusion

Prescriptivism is the view that sincere moral judgements necessarily express the judger's overriding commitment about how to act. For example, suppose you say that you think one ought to do something, but you are not committed to doing it in the relevant circumstances, or to having it done to you in those circumstances. The developer of Prescriptivism, R.M. Hare thought that what made moral prescriptions different from non-moral ones was that any moral judgment about what a particular individual ought to do in some set of circumstances entails a universal judgment about what anyone with that person's characteristics ought to do in those circumstances. Hare rejected subjective idea of morality in emotivism. He believed that moral statements did more than describe behaviour or expressing attitudes. Hare argued that moral statements had a prescriptive quality because they commanded behaviour, guiding our actions. Moral statements are made to guide choices, both of our own and other people's. When someone says that abortion is wrong, a person is trying to prescribe an attitude and say that you would like somebody to come round to your way of thinking. Hare made a case for moral statements having universal and prescriptive qualities, while he also accounts for the work done by A.J Ayer and C.L Stevenson. R.M Hare's development of a meta-ethical theory retains objective moral norms presents an alternative to traditional normative ethics. Sian Chesher Ethics - October 2003 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Ethics 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 GCSE Ethics essays

  1. Aristotle - Virtue Ethics Essay

    Modern scholar Bertrand Russell states that Aristotle's ethics are "elitist and morally repugnant". He goes on to say that while Aristotle places emphasis upon 'flourishing' in his ethical theory, most people (ie the masses) will not flourish at all and so is vastly elitist.

  2. Explain the difference between Meta ethics and Normative ethics.

    Normative ethics can be spilt into categories. Teleological theory. This means that moral judgements are based entirely on the effects produced by an action. This view considers appeals to common sense. An action is considered right or wrong in relation of its consequences.

  1. Explain how Aristotle and Alasdair Macintyre applied Virtue Theory to moral decision making?

    it is the individual of good character who stands the best chance to determine the most ethical course of action. This is not to say that a virtuous individual does not appeal to utility or rules to determine what the right answer is.

  2. Compare and contrast Plato and Aristotle on the acquisition of ethical understanding.

    Similarly, Mill would argue for the greater good as did Plato. Mill argued for the Greatest Happiness Principle. This holds that actions are 'right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.'

  1. How Plausible is Cultural Relativism

    Nevertheless, it still raises doubts over the credibility of Rachels' argument. It is also possible to question Rachels' assertation that different societies have different moral codes. All societies, for instance, prohibit murder, rape and steeling which are all actions that most humans consider morally wrong regardless of the society that they are from.

  2. Are Moral Values Objective Or Subjective?

    if they are born with an instinct for example to not kill, maybe they are not able to express themselves at such a young age.

  1. Explain what Scholars means when they say ethical statements are no more than expressions ...

    Nevertheless, words such as 'good' have descriptive and prescriptive value in order to set standards. For example 'stealing is wrong' is an opinion from an Emotivist's point of view, which incurs a descriptive meaning. Conversely, 'you ought not to steal' is a prescriptive point of view.

  2. Virtue Ethics

    Hence his ideas of the virtues lay between to vices. However, Alasdair MacIntyre explained that many virtues are not a mid-point, as they are good in themselves like; faithfulness, loyalty and compassion. Aristotle believed in two types of virtue, one being intellectual virtue; in which you developed by training and education.

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