META – ETHICS
- Important branch of ethics in philosophy that looks at the scope and foundation of moral values and
moral properties.
THREE IMPORTANT BRANCHES OF ETHICS
META - ETHICS
- Underlying foundation of the two
- It focuses on what morality is.
NORMATIVE ETHICS
- Seeks to give us a framework for ethics and tell us how we ought to live.
Like should we act in the way that will bring about the best consequences? Or should we act in a way
as to conform with moral laws?
APPLIED ETHICS
- Seeks to apply normative ethical theories to specific issues.
- Deals with topics like justice, abortion, animal rights, death penalty, etc
Andrew Fisher explains the relationship between these three with an analogy of a football game.
The players can be thought of as an issue of applied ethics. They are concerned of specific strategies
of getting the ball inside the net just like applied ethics is concerned with how ethics is applied
strategically on certain issues.
The referee can be seen as an issue of normative ethics. The normative ethicist is concerned with
underlying principles which guide the applied ethicists.
The meta - ethicists can be thought of as football analysts, does not apply the ethics or interpret the
rules but tries to understand what is going on in the game itself.
Is it all subjective or are there actual rules that must be followed?
A meta - ethicists looks at the work of ethics and tries to make sense of everything that is going on.
COGNITIVISM VS. NON COGNITIVISM
A. Cognitivism
- Cognitivists say moral claims are describing or attempting to describe reality.
- If someone expresses a moral claim they are expressing a belief
- Example: If a cognitivist says that it’s wrong to steal then she has said what is going on is something
about the world that is either objectively true or false.
i. Moral realism
- The view that moral values exist in a way that is causally and evidentially independent from the
beliefs of anyone and everyone such that evidence and beliefs do not determine and constitute those
values, though they may adequately and reliably measure or reflect them.
- Moral values are true regardless of what the individual thinks.
- Individuals may require knowledge about what moral truths are and learn to abide by them.
- Moral values are not determined or dependent on the individual
- Moral values merely describe actions in nature as either good or bad.
a. Naturalism
- Says that moral properties are part of the natural world, and can be reduced to natural or non -
ethical properties
b. Non - naturalism
- Says that moral properties cannot be reduced to non - ethical parts.
- Moral values are real and independent of nature.
ii. Ethical subjectivism
- Meta-ethical view which claims that ethical sentences express propositions. Some such propositions
are true. The truth or falsity of such propositions is ineliminably dependent on the attitudes of people.
B. Non - Cognitivism
- Non - cognitivists do not think moral claims are attempts to describe reality.
- The non - cognitivists argues that if a person a moral claim they are expressing a non - belief state
such as an emotion.
- Example: To say that killing is wrong is to express disapproval towards killing. Put crudely l, it is as if
you are saying “Boo Killing!”
- Emotionally disapproving or approving of something cannot be true or false.
- You’re not making claims about the world that could be true or false, you are expressing emotions
about how you feel which would not be cognitive but emotional and therefore, neither true or false.
i. Emotivism
- Moral judgements are not claims about reality but are emotional expressions of the speaker.
UNIVERSALISM VS. RELATIVISM
a. Moral universalism
- Theorizes that moral facts and principles apply to everybody in all places.
- Also called ‘moral objectivism’, it claims that universal ethic exists and that this applies to all similarly
situated persons regardless of nationality, citizenship, culture, race, gender, sexual preference,
religion, or any other differentiating factor.
- Believing that some behaviors are simply wrong, it also submits that if something is right for one,
then it is right for another.
b. Moral relativism
- Submits that different moral facts and principles apply to different persons or group of individuals.
- Believing that various cultures have distinct standards of right and wrong, it also maintains that
ethical standards also change over time even in the same culture. Denying a single, objective
standard for morality, it holds that all moral norms are equally true and morals are mere preferences.
EMPIRICISM VS. RATIONALISM VS. INTUITIONISM
a. Moral empiricism
- States that moral facts are known through observation and experience.
b. Moral rationalism
- Contends that moral facts and principles are knowable a priori, that is by reason alone and without
reference to experience.
c. Moral intuitionism
- Moral truths are knowable by intuition, that is, by
- Immediate instinctive knowledge without reference to any evidence.
CRITERIA:
Video clip - 15 pts
Oral report - 40 pts
Written report - 20 pts
Q& A - 10 pts