WJEC/Eduqas RS for A2/Yr2: Religion and Ethics (DRAFT)

T1 Ethical Thought

through the history of its usage, to produce (result from) affective responses in people’. In other words, there are certain ethical words that are very well suited to an emotive meaning because they have a dynamic use. To leave an emotive element of such words out would mean we are misled to believe that it is purely descriptive when in actual fact this ignores its dynamic usage and so its actual meaning is distorted. The reason that the term ‘good’ is indefinable is because in any definition of it the emotive element will be distorted. Stevenson argued that good has a pleasing emotive meaning and that ‘this is a rough description of meaning and not a definition’; however, it is adequate enough. Stevenson suggested that the emotive aspects of ethical propositions were used in a variety of different ways although he tended to see persuasive definitions as a common use. His research is vast, and the book Ethics and Language is 336 pages long but these initial observations serve to show that there is much more to ethical propositions than just being expressions of personal approval (hurrah) or disapproval (boo). Key quote While Stevenson granted that moral language didn’t have factual or cognitive content, he argued that it had emotive meaning. Moral propositions aren’t true or false, but they aren’t meaningless either – moral language allows us to express emotions. (Messerly) Emotivism explains why people disagree about morality Key quote Thus he could easily account for our differences regarding ethics – we have different emotions. And when we disagree, Stevenson said we have a disagreement in attitude. But reasons or arguments will not change other people’s attitudes. (Messerly) The obvious conclusion to be drawn from Emotivism is that if ethical propositions are really just expressions of approval or disapproval then it follows that people inevitably will disagree about morality because we are all simply expressing our own opinions. Moreover, it may then be suggested that there can never be any agreement in ethical debate and also that maybe ethical debate becomes pointless. Ethical debate would just become our emotional response to facts that we all agree on; since emotions are not verifiable and cannot contribute to meaningful logical discourse, ethics becomes meaningless. However, for Stevenson ethical debate was meaningful and to demonstrate this he made a distinction between propositions, distinguishing between propositions about ‘belief’ and propositions about ‘attitude’ . Attitudes are statements that reflect the emotive use of ethical language in debate; they reveal how the person feels and sees things. Beliefs are more to do with facts that can be verified such as the ‘nature of light transmission’ to use Stevenson’s example, or, something like the date that you last met somebody. Beliefs are not about ethical convictions. ■ War is the last resort, and abortion is the legal termination of a foetus, are examples of beliefs. ■ War/abortion is always wrong and war/abortion is sometimes wrong are attitudes.

1.28 For a clear ethical de nition, what three things needed to be present according to Stevenson?

DRAFT

Stevenson saw persuasion as a key purpose of ethical discourse.

Key terms Propositions about belief: statements of fact or veri able by empirical means Propositions about attitude: views or value judgements about statements of belief

55