• 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. 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.

  2. 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.

  1. "'Right' and 'wrong' are just expressions of preference; they do not refer to any ...

    Listening to different emotive opinions will give us a broader out look on moral issues because there are many different points of view to be heard. There too are some problems with this theory. Some logical positivists such as A J Ayer class Emotivism as "meaningless" because it simply " expresses moral judgement and does not say anything".

  2. Explain how a Hindu marriage service might guide a couple in their married life?

    Because of this, arranged marriages have been common in Hinduism with parents introducing people to each other. However, most modern Hindus believe that they only get married if they see their true love. Most Christians believe that that a marriage is choice by the couple and that they can have

  1. Discuss whether moral judgements are subjective or objective

    Macquarrie and Childress write that this rule is not to provide a guideline for interpersonal relations but it is meant to get rid of our self-centredness so that we can become aware of others rights and needs (Macquarrie and Childress 1986 pg.

  2. "Describe and evaluate Emotivism, showing knowledge of its key thinkers and critics?"

    The first philosopher was A. J Ayer who introduced Emotivism. He believed that there were two types of moral statement. The first was synthetic statements which can be tested by sense experience.

  1. 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.

  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.'

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