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

Explain what scholars mean when they say that ethical statements are no more than expressions of opinion? (33)

Extracts from this document...


Explain what scholars mean when they say that ethical statements are no more than expressions of opinion? (33) Meta-ethicists study the meaning of moral judgements and analyse the reasoning behind ethical systems. They limit themselves to studying the nature of morality and meaning of moral judgements. Meta-ethics concentrate more on the reasoning rather than content of ethical statements. There are four main theories that are used when studying ethical language. Intuitionists claim that morality is self-evident. An intuitions is thought of as someone who holds a particular view about the way in which we come to find out which of our actions are right and wrong. W.D. Ross was one of the main scholars who pioneered this theory. He had been greatly influenced by the earlier work of Moore and Prichard. He argued that what was 'right' and 'obligatory' were just as indefinable as 'good'. Toss defined 'right' as: "...suitable, in a unique and indefinable way which we may express by the phrase 'morally suitable' to the situation in which an individual finds himself" (Foundation of Ethics) He drew a clear distinction between what is right to do and what is good to do. ...read more.


theory: 'x is wrong' or 'I disagree with x' = 'Boo!' 'x is right' or 'I agree with x' = 'Hurrah!' It can be said that emotivism is merely based on personal opinion rather than a complex moral theory. If all of our behaviour is based on how we feel and out psychological response to things, how often can we be sure of anything? there must be a stronger case for making out ethical decisions that simply approving and disapproving of certain actions. The questions that Emotivism left open spurred on scholars to dig deeper and to study the philosophy of meta-ethics more analytically. The original group of philosophers involved in this were known as the 'Vienna Circle' - founded by M.Schlick, R.Carnap and O.Newrath in the 1920's. In 1929, the Vienna Circle published a paper saying that the main objective was to establish the necessary criteria for talking meaningfully about the world. These meta-ethicists are known as Logical Positivists. Logical Positivism is about establishing the ways in which the truth or falsehood of certain statements can be shown. therefore, if a statement cannot be proved either true or false, it is meaningless. ...read more.


this theory also fails to suggest where our ethics come from. It only states that we pass a judgement and then make a suggestion on what should be done about it. Once again, through prescriptive statements, we've merely expressed a personal opinion rather than a black and white absolute. b) How far do you consider these views can be justified? All of the meta-ethical theories that I have looked at have shown that moral truth is relative. Most, if not all ethical viewpoints are simply personal opinions rather than absolute moral law. Logical Positivism can to a certain extent say whether something is good or bad - depending on whether it has empirical evidence or blatant truth to support it. Even so, a large portion of important ethical statements are discarded as 'meaningless' just because they are not analytical or synthetic. This goes to show that you can never find a way to absolute truth by studying meta-ethics. In a pluralistic society there are bound to be conflicts and overlap when it comes to moral and ethical standards, so I can understand why scholars say that ethical statements are no more than expression of opinion. ...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. Compare and contrast Plato and Aristotle on the acquisition of ethical understanding.

    This is different to most contemporary theories which are act centred such as deontological theories where 'certain features of the act itself determine whether it is right or wrong'. (Palmer.) Aristotle however would argue that virtues, and therefore morals are gained by habit.

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

    This is in the form of our conscience. Our conscience tells us what we believe to be right or wrong and the reasons behind it. It is beneficial because 'good' and 'bad' are self evident and therefore easy to distinguish. We can instantly see if something is right or wrong by logical thinking.

  1. Discuss whether moral judgments are subjective or objective

    This system of values is not widely accepted by society; however this does not mean automatic condemnation, as through emotivism this difference of opinion is justified. People have a diverse and varying view of morality - an act cannot be condemned, as it does not fall into what is accepted as the norm.

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

    These opinions are forms of approval or disapproval of an ethical idea. An example of this is when people say 'Euthanasia is wrong'. According to Emotivist scholars, this statement cannot be verified or proven to be true or false, as 'wrong' is expressing feelings of disapproval.

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

    However the philosopher Stevenson would disagree. Stevenson argued that a moral judgement contains either an expression of an attitude based on a belief or a persuasive element which seeks to influence others. He maintains that a moral disagreement tells us more about the peoples beliefs, rather than a "boo / hurrah" shouting match.

  2. Euthanasia can never be justified

    how the disease will progress is wrong and the patient is not going to die soon. The patient could be is getting bad medical care and their suffering could be relieved by other means. Doctors could be unaware of other non-fatal options that could be offered to the patient.

  1. With reference to abortion, examine and comment on the view that the sanctity of ...

    even if they do not result in bad acts. Once this is recognized, supporters argue that utilitarianism becomes a much more complex, and rich, moral theory, and may align much more closely with our moral intuitions. Some critics reject utilitarianism, both rule and act, on the basis that it is seems to be incompatible with human rights.

  2. At the beginning of evaluating the necessity for ethical principles it is logical to ...

    Another issue is the deception. It should be avoided at any point. If the researcher believes that it's necessary then the participant must be provided with a thorough explanation as soon as possible. It is important that the participant understands the effect of the research to avoid any sense of unease.

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