What is Meta-ethics? (L1-Introduction)

Summary

This video introduces metaethics, a branch of moral philosophy, by exploring the debate between Socrates and Thrasymachus on whether morality is objective or a human construct. It explains that metaethics delves into the nature of ethical language and the foundational questions about morality. The video covers the two main positions in metaethics: cognitivism, which believes moral statements can be true or false, and non-cognitivism, which sees them as meaningless. This is an essential overview for A-level students, providing a foundation for understanding various ethical theories.

Takeaways

• 😀 Metaethics is the study of the nature of ethical language and morality itself.
• 😀 Socrates argued that morality exists as an objective standard, while Thrasymachus claimed morality is a human creation.
• 😀 Metaethics examines fundamental questions about morality, such as whether moral language is meaningful or meaningless.
• 😀 The three main branches of moral philosophy are applied ethics, normative ethics, and metaethics.
• 😀 Metaethics is the deepest level of moral philosophy, exploring the assumptions behind all ethical theories.
• 😀 When making moral statements, we are also making a position in both normative and metaethics, whether we realize it or not.
• 😀 **Cognitivism** is the belief that moral language is meaningful and moral statements are truth-apt (capable of being true or false).
• 😀 **Non-cognitivism** argues that moral language is meaningless and moral statements are not truth-apt—they cannot be true or false.
• 😀 A proposition is a statement that makes a claim about something that can be true or false; cognitivists believe moral statements are propositions.
• 😀 Non-cognitivism suggests that moral statements express emotions or attitudes, not facts or truths.
• 😀 Understanding the positions of cognitivism and non-cognitivism helps students answer exam questions effectively, especially in evaluating moral language.

Q & A

What is the primary focus of metaethics?

Metaethics focuses on the nature of morality itself, exploring questions about the meaning of moral language, the nature of moral judgments, and whether moral claims are objective or subjective.

How does metaethics differ from applied ethics and normative ethics?

Metaethics delves into the foundational questions about morality, whereas applied ethics focuses on specific moral issues (e.g., euthanasia, abortion), and normative ethics addresses the principles that guide moral decision-making (e.g., utilitarianism, deontology).

What is the historical context for the discussion of metaethics?

The historical context for metaethics can be traced back to ancient Greek philosophy, particularly in Plato's *Republic*, where Socrates debates Thrasymachus on whether morality is an objective truth or a human invention.

What are the two main positions in metaethics?

The two main positions in metaethics are cognitivism, which holds that moral statements are meaningful and can be true or false, and non-cognitivism, which argues that moral statements are meaningless and cannot be true or false.

How do cognitivists view moral language?

Cognitivists believe that moral language is meaningful and that moral statements, such as 'murder is wrong,' are propositions that can be true or false.

How do non-cognitivists view moral language?

Non-cognitivists argue that moral language is not meaningful in the same way as factual language. They believe that moral statements express emotions or attitudes, rather than making claims that can be true or false.

What does 'truth-apt' mean in the context of metaethics?

'Truth-apt' refers to the ability of a statement to be true or false. In metaethics, cognitivists believe that moral statements are truth-apt, while non-cognitivists deny this, saying that moral statements cannot be true or false.

Can non-cognitivists be said to believe that moral statements are false?

No, non-cognitivists do not believe that moral statements are false. Rather, they claim that moral statements are not propositions and therefore cannot be true or false. They are seen as expressions of emotional attitudes.

How can the difference between cognitivism and non-cognitivism be remembered simply?

A simple way to remember the difference is: Cognitivism believes moral language is meaningful and can be true or false, while non-cognitivism believes moral language is meaningless and cannot be true or false.

Why is understanding metaethics important for evaluating moral claims?

Understanding metaethics is important because it helps clarify the underlying assumptions behind moral claims. Whether moral statements are seen as objective truths or human-made expressions influences how we approach moral discussions and ethical decision-making.