“Ethical Language is Subjective”. Discuss. (35) Subjectivity or Objectivity in the way that ethical language is used is considered within the broader study of meta-ethics, often described as a second order moral discourse, which considers the meaning of ethical terms such as good, bad, right or wrong. To say that ethical language is subjective is to suggest that there does not exist an objective or universally accepted understanding of, for example, goodness and that is merely reflects an individual’s opinion or viewpoint. AJ Ayer in his book “language, truth and Logic” outlines what is commonly called the “emotivist” approach to ethical language.
Meta-Ethics is a branch of ethics which is concerned with the language that is used in ethical arguments. Many would say that if we do not know what we are talking about, then there is not point to ethical debate. This differs from normative which deicides whether or not something is bad or good and gives us a guide for moral behaviour. Meta-ethics is about normative ethics and tried to make sense of the terms and concepts used. The terms good and bad are used a lot in day to day sentences - but what do they really mean?
Meta ethics is the study of ethical language; however it differs from normative ethics. Normative ethics determines what is “good” and “bad”, whereas Meta ethics determines the meanings of the terms “good” and “bad”. There are two ethical approaches to Meta ethics, one being Cognitivism. Cognitivism is the view that ethical language can be known and understood objectively, through empirical experience or intuition. The second approach is Non-Cognitivism, this is the view that ethical language cannot be known and understood, due to subjectivity.
Meta ethics tries to make sense of the terms and concepts used in ethical theories such as Utilitarianism and Natural Law. Some people believe that ethical language is extremely meaningful as they argue it is essential to be able to define terms such as “good” and “bad” before we can even begin to discuss ethical theories. However others disagree with this and argue that moral statements are subjective so are meaningless, as they cannot be described as either true or false. Those who hold cognitive theories about ethical language would argue that ethical statements are not meaningless as they are about facts, and can therefore be proved true or false. Ethical Naturalism is a cognitive theory of meta ethics which holds the belief that
Ethical language is subjective. Discuss. ( 35 marks) This statement is asking whether the meaning of terms like good/ bad right wrong exist independent of us or whether they are simply expressions of an individuals’ mood, experience or perception. Having studied a number of meta ethical approaches: I disagree that ethical language is subjective and side with intuitionism, that ethical knowledge is objective, yet indefinable like the colour yellow. G.E Moore begins by rejecting ethical naturalism, the belief that ethical knowledge is based on empirical evidence.
Moral relativism and absolutism are extremes comparative to east and west or good vs evil. While there are areas in between, fundamentally, societies fall in one or the other. The explanation of moral fundamentalism and absolutism is not easily achieved. However a brief explanative on each should make it self evident as to where American society lies. Comparing these two contrasting views on morals is not as easy as one would think.
In searching for what nonconsequentialist believe, I found that it is the opposition of consequentalism. One view that is in opposition to consequentialism is deontology. Alexander describes dentology: In contemporary moral philosophy, deontology is one of those kinds of normative theories regarding which choices are morally required, forbidden, or permitted. In other words, deontology falls within the domain of moral theories that guide and assess our choices of what we ought to do (deontic theories), in contrast to (aretaic [virtue] theories) that—fundamentally, at least—guide and assess what kind of person (in terms of character traits) we are and should be. And within that domain, deontologists—those who subscribe to deontological theories of morality—stand in opposition to
The ethical issue being examined withdrawing treatment on the end of life. Although there are many legal issues associated with this topic, this paper will focus on the ethical issues. Rowson (1990) defines the term ethics as thinking and reasoning about morality. Beauchamp and Childress (1994) assert that ethics is designed to illuminate what we ought to do by asking us to consider and reconsider our ordinary actions, judgements and justifications. They also developed an ethical framework based on 4 moral principles.
There are so many conflicting theories that it makes it almost impossible to choose what the moral thing to do would be. In his essay, Jamieson doesn’t say that he’ll solve the problems of moral theory but he’ll discuss them, the nature of moral theory and some questions of method. In the first part of his essay Jamieson talks about the nature of moral theories. There are two approaches to making a moral theory; Top-Down system (Dominant conception) or Bottom-up system (Anti-theorist). The dominant conception of moral theories suggests they are abstract structures that sort actions, agents and outcomes into categories.
Travis St. Peter Professor ENC 1101 Section 17C 2 February 2013 How a bad life altering event can turn into a life saving event I never thought about how one event can change another in life until I started paying attention and started noticing how things could be different. I had a very unfortunate life changing event happen to be at the age of 18 when I was serving my country in the Marine Corp. I was deploying to Okinowa, Japan and thanks to a clerk with my medical records they lost my shot records, so I had to have 13 shots in 1 day and go back to work as if everything was normal. The next morning I had to go on the obstacle course and never thought when I woke up that morning my life would never be the same. I was going through