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?
But does this strictly subjective understanding of ethical language and statements accurately reflect what is going on when we use such language? C.L. Stevenson recognised that whilst ethical statements could not be proven or “verified”, when we use ethical terms we do so
Cognitivism is the view that we can have moral knowledge. People who hold cognitive theories about ethical language believe that ethical statements are about facts and can be proved true or false. Non-cognitivists make the distinction between facts and values. Therefore those that have cognitive theories of ethics will say that ethical language is not meaningless and there is something to learn from it, whereas those that follow non-cognitive theories will agree with the essay question saying that it cannot be verified. A.J.
Some people believe that culture is a way that morality can be established, but morality differs from culture to culture. In Doing Ethics, Lewis Vaughn talks about cultural relativism and lays out an argument for it. In the second premise it states “If people’s judgments about right and wrong differ from culture to culture, then right and wrong are relative to culture, and there are no objective moral principles” (Vaughn 26). He makes it clear that he does not support this premise and explains his points as to why this is false. Cultural relativism is the idea that the moral principles someone has are solely determined by the culture one lives in.
Aristotle Dialectic Induction, example To show the basis of many similar instances that something is so And syllogism “to show that if some premises are true something else beyond them results from them because they are true Rhetoric Paradigm” similar cases And Enthymem Pathos (audience) Ethos (speaker) Logos (speech subject) Possible varieties of persuasion Subjects rhetorician talks about-things in the community “rhetoric masquerades to political science” Why is it so important, the differences between dialectic and rhetoric. ; the two run in tandem, use similar methods, their similarities do not suggest that rhetoric is not a sloppy derivitive of dialectic. Dialectic deals with induction: two kind of thinking induction or deductive: one simply gathers similar cases or examples, fills up a classification, suggests if done properly what is true with one classification will be true with theothers. Otherwise they wouldn’t be in the same category. 2nd is deduction: on the basis if” and “if” and “then” chain of reasoning.
Unit one also taught me to reevaluate how important certain priorities when it came to writing. I learned from the other unit one authors, Joseph M. Williams and James E. Porter, that when an essay is read by someone who is looking for grammatical error or plagiarism instead of content, they will often find the error and ignore the content. Although I do still know the importance of grammar and originality, this class and the grading style has let me put those constructs in the back seat until the editing process, instead of making them something I had to constantly worry about. I don’t believe that good writing revolves around grammar, but rather how well your words can convey a message to the intended audiences.
Diction After deciding the structure and the other related norms of writing the sentence, the next step should be the diction. Diction is in fact the writing style of the writer, which sometimes also depicts the mood of the writer. The writer can use the narrative tone, the descriptive tone, and any other style. But some of the major things that should be considered in writing the effective writing include clear thoughts and concrete abstract concepts. Mixing and intermingling, the text can make the reader confused and overall the image of the writing is conveyed as
Ethos and Logos LOGOS Logos is different from pathos. Instead of a person using emotion to convince someone to believe his argument, he uses a logical approach. Therefore, he doesn't provide a story that has emotional impact, but facts and reasoning. There are two types of logical reasoning, inductive and deductive. With inductive reasoning a person starts with a premise and provides reasons and facts to support the argument.
I Have a Dream 1. Definition of Ethos, Pathos and Logos and examples: a. Ethos i. Definition: the ethical appeal is based on the character, credibility, or reliability of the writer (Using Rhetorical Strategies for Persuasion). ii. Example: Martin Luther King Jr. uses ethos and establishes his credibility when he explains how he has been discriminated against.
When the topic of writing is discussed, there are many different thoughts and feelings that arise within a discussion. Some of the thoughts that may arise include the following: what is writing, should writing be used as punishment, do we all construct horrible first drafts, and is writing really that difficult? These various topics are talked about in the following essays entitled, “Writing Is Not a Skill” by Stanley Aronowitz, “I Won’t Use Writing as Punishment” by Roy Peter Clark, “Shitty First Drafts” by Anne Lamott, and “Bonehead Writing” by Craig Vetter. Within each essay the author displays to readers his or her beliefs of how writing should be. Writing can be considered both an art form, as well as a skill.