Download lesson 1._Intro_ethical_language

Ethical language
Lesson Objectives:
Understand the use of ethical language, and how different
philosophers argue that it can be meaningful or meaningless
H/W: Research Hume’s is/ought distinction
Starter Task: ask students to try and think of one thing that Kantian
ethics, Utilitarianism, Natural Law
and religious ethics all have in common.
In this unit you will learn about …
The use of ethical language – the ways in which
different scholars understand how words such as
‘good’, ‘bad’, ‘right’, ‘wrong’, are used when ethical
statements are made.
How meta-ethics differs from normative ethics
The different ethical approaches: e.g. cognitive, noncognitive, ethical naturalism and intuitionism;
emotivism and prescriptivism.
How to discuss these areas critically and evaluate the
strengths and weaknesses
What do words mean?
META-ETHICS does not provide moral guidelines but
looks at the way in which language is used in ethics.
What does Hume’s example of “murder is wrong’
actually mean?”
How is Hume different from Kantian ethics,
Utilitarianism and Natural Law?
ANSWER: They would explain murder’s wrongness in terms of ethical laws,
whereas Hume questions what the word ‘wrong’ actually means. This is the
difference.
Introduction to
Meta-Ethics
The word ‘meta’ in Greek means ‘above’ or ‘beyond’; thus
meta-ethics goes further than ethical theories to look at
what is meant by the terms used in ethics – what does the
language mean?
‘First order moral discourse’ refers to when we apply
ethical theories. E.g. A utilitarian might argue that
country X ought to invade country Y because it will bring
about the greatest amount of happiness; a Kantian might
argue that country X ought not to invade country Y
because it violates the rights of those living in country Y
and that the action itself is not one that can be
universalised.
Introduction to
Meta-Ethics
Meta-ethics is known as ‘second order moral
discourse’ because it takes us behind what is going
on in Normative Ethics. It looks at the words that we
use, the way we use them and the structure of the
arguments.
Consolidate
Explain ‘first order moral discourse’ and ‘second
order moral discourse’ to the person next to you.
The meaning of words
What do we understand by ‘mean’ and ‘meaning’
when we use it in everyday language?
I mean to buy her a Valentine card
I mean to win this race
What is the meaning of life?
The convict looked really mean
Those dark clouds mean it is going to rain
Does ‘good’ mean socially approved?
Do you understand what I mean?
Lets do some Meta-Ethics
What does ‘good’ mean?
• Is it something I approve of? (E.g. the Iraq War)
• Is it something that fulfils its purpose? (E.g. a knife that cuts)
• Is it someone or something that has moral worth? (E.g. Jesus or
pacifism)
• Is it my own opinion? (The music of U2 or Muse)
• Is it what God/a holy book says that we should do? (E.g. do not
steal)
Write down whether you agree or disagree with each of these
definitions of what ‘good’ means and give reasons to support
your answer
NB: Can you see the categories beings
used to define good in each statement?
Wittgenstein
His work has shaped the development of analytic,
linguistic philosophy
‘What are these things we call thoughts, and how can
they reach out and touch, encompass, reality: real
things, real facts? What, after all, are words and
sentences, the vehicles we use to express our
thoughts? … If they “represent” by virtue of being
expressions of thought, how are we to understand
the nature of these thoughts?’ Wittgenstein as cited
by Arrington
Define….
‘Murder is wrong’
Bad
Right
Wrong
Plenary
What is Meta-Ethics?
write an explanation