The Nature of Moral Principles
Moral principles
Moral principles are guidelines or rules that inform our judgments about what is right or wrong.
They raise fundamental questions:
- Do they exist?
- Are they universal or relative?
Universal vs. Relative Moral Principles
Universal Moral Principles apply to all people, regardless of culture or situation.
The belief that murder is wrong in all contexts.
Relative Moral Principles depend on cultural, social, or situational contexts.
Polygamy may be accepted in some cultures but not in others.
Understanding whether moral principles are universal or relative is crucial for navigating ethical dilemmas and understanding different cultural perspectives.
Foundations for Moral Judgments
- Rationality: The use of reason and logic to determine moral principles.
- Example: Kant's categorical imperative, which relies on universalizable maxims.
- Emotion: The role of feelings and intuitions in shaping moral judgments.
- Example: Emotivism, which views moral statements as expressions of emotional responses.
- Natural Law: The belief that moral principles are derived from the natural order of the world.
- Example: Aquinas's view that human reason can discern moral laws inherent in nature.
- Environment: The influence of cultural, social, and situational factors on moral judgments.
- Example: Cultural relativism, which argues that moral principles are shaped by cultural norms.
When analyzing moral judgments, consider how different foundations — rationality, emotion, natural law, and environment — interact and influence each other.
Cognitivism and Non-Cognitivism
Cognitivism
The view that moral statements express beliefs and can be true or false.
Moral realism, which holds that moral facts exist independently of our beliefs.
Non-cognitivism
The view that moral statements express emotions or commands and are not truth-apt.
Emotivism, which sees moral statements as expressions of approval or disapproval.
- Cognitivist Statement: "Stealing is wrong" is a factual claim that can be true or false.
- Non-Cognitivist Statement: "Stealing is wrong" expresses disapproval and is not truth-apt.
Naturalism and Non-Naturalism
Naturalism
The view that moral properties are reducible to natural properties (e.g., pleasure, pain).
Utilitarianism, which equates moral goodness with the maximization of pleasure.
Non-naturalism
The view that moral properties are irreducible and distinct from natural properties.
G. E. Moore's intuitionism, which argues that "good" is a simple, indefinable property.
Naturalism seeks to ground moral judgments in observable facts, while non-naturalism emphasizes the unique nature of moral properties.
Intuitionism and Emotivism
Intuitionism
The belief that moral truths are self-evident and can be known through intuition.
G. E. Moore's claim that we can intuitively recognize the goodness of certain actions.
Emotivism
The view that moral statements express emotions and are not truth-apt.
A. J. Ayer's assertion that saying "Stealing is wrong" is equivalent to saying "Boo to stealing!"
- Don't confuse intuitionism with emotivism.
- Intuitionism claims that moral truths are self-evident, while emotivism argues that moral statements are merely expressions of emotion.
Analyzing Moral Judgments
- Identify the Foundation: Determine whether the judgment is based on rationality, emotion, natural law, or environmental factors.
- Evaluate the Perspective: Consider whether the judgment aligns with cognitivism, non-cognitivism, naturalism, or non-naturalism.
- Consider the Context: Analyze how cultural, social, or situational factors influence the judgment.
- What are the key differences between cognitivism and non-cognitivism?
- How do naturalism and non-naturalism approach the nature of moral properties?
- Can you identify examples of intuitionism and emotivism in everyday moral judgments?
