The Nature of Ethical and Aesthetic Judgments
Ayer's Emotivism: Ethical Judgments as Expressions of Emotion
- Ayer's emotivism is a form of non-cognitivism, which argues that moral statements do not describe facts or truths.
- Instead, they express the speaker's emotional attitudes.
- Moral statements are not propositions that can be true or false.
- They are expressions of approval or disapproval.
Example
- When someone says, "Stealing is wrong," they are not stating a fact about stealing.
- Instead, they are expressing their disapproval of stealing, similar to saying, "Boo to stealing!"
Ethical Judgments as Non-Cognitive
- Non-cognitivism holds that ethical judgments do not state facts or convey knowledge.
- Instead, they serve other functions:
- Expressing emotions: Moral statements reveal the speaker's feelings.
- Influencing behavior: They aim to persuade others to adopt similar attitudes.
Note
Non-cognitivism contrasts with cognitivism, which argues that moral statements can be true or false because they describe moral facts or truths.
Implications for Moral Reasoning and Disagreement
- Moral reasoning: If moral statements are not factual, traditional logical arguments may not apply.
- Moral disagreement: Disagreements become clashes of attitudes rather than debates over objective truths.
Hint
- When analyzing moral disagreements, consider whether the conflict is about factual beliefs or underlying emotional attitudes.
- This can clarify the nature of the disagreement and potential paths to resolution.
Aesthetic Judgments as Expressions of Taste
Ayer extends his emotivist approach to aesthetic judgments:
- Aesthetic statements do not state facts about art or beauty.
- They express personal tastes or attitudes.
Example
- Saying "This painting is beautiful" is not a factual claim.
- It's an expression of the speaker's appreciation for the painting.
Comparing Ethical and Aesthetic Judgments
- Similarities:
- Both express subjective attitudes rather than objective facts.
- Both are non-cognitive, according to Ayer's view.
- Differences:
- Ethical judgments often aim to influence behavior, while aesthetic judgments primarily express personal taste.
Analogy
- Think of ethical and aesthetic judgments like cheering for a sports team. Saying "Go team!" expresses support but doesn't state a fact.
- Similarly, moral and aesthetic statements express attitudes without claiming objective truth.
Criticisms and Challenges
- Moral objectivity: Critics argue that emotivism undermines the idea of moral objectivity, making it difficult to justify ethical principles.
- Moral disagreement: If moral statements are mere expressions of emotion, it's unclear how genuine moral disagreements can be resolved.
Note
Emotivism has been challenged by philosophers who argue that moral and aesthetic judgments can have cognitive content, meaning they can convey truths or knowledge about the world.
Reflection and Broader Implications
- Emotivism highlights the role of emotion in ethical and aesthetic judgments, challenging traditional views of morality and art.
- It raises important questions about the nature of moral reasoning, disagreement, and the possibility of objective ethical or aesthetic standards.
Self review
- How does Ayer's emotivism challenge traditional views of moral and aesthetic judgments?
- What are the implications of viewing ethical and aesthetic statements as non-cognitive?
- How might one respond to the criticism that emotivism undermines moral objectivity?
