1. Cognitivist and Non-Cognitivist LO: I will understand GE Moore’s idea of naturalistic fallacy. Ethical judgments, such as "We should all donate to charity," then, are mixtures of both descriptive (cognitive) and accomplishment-oriented (noncognitive) components. Write a definition of Cognitive and non- cognitive on your glossaries

2. Non-Cognativism: Hume – only if something can be proved true or false then it can be discussed using reason. Stevenson – emotivism expression of attitudes based on beliefs and a persuasive argument intended to influence others. G.E. Moore criticised naturalism. Instead he said we have an infallible intuitive knowledge of good things. Naturalism: Moral truths are facts – can be proved. Intuitionism: What is good? Cannot be described, like ‘yellow’, we intuitively know what good is. Prescriptivism: Hare – moral statements are commands. Good is what can be universalised. Can Ethical Statements be proven true or false? Yes: Cognitivism: Moral statements purport to state moral facts (aka realism). No: Non-cognitivism:There are no ‘moral beliefs’ (accepted by emotivists and perscriptivists). Starter Task: Explain whether The statements Are true or false Cognitivist and Non-Cognitivist

3. Branches of Normative Ethics In contrast, the subject matter of meta ethics is not moral issues themselves, but rather, with philosophy itself. This involves an examination of the more fundamental assumptions and beliefs that normative theorists might hold. There are 3 branches to Meta Ethics: Metaphysics (e.g. do words like ‘good’ and ‘bad’ pick out any objective qualities that we can discover? Is ‘good’ and ‘bad; just a matter of personal taste or opinion? Ethical objectivism says there isn’t), Epistemology – how do we acquire knowledge and what does it consist in? E.g. How do we learn moral truths? Is it through our senses or do we gain knowledge through other means? Language – Looking at the nature of moral statements. E.g. What speech acts (to state a fact, express feeling, or give a command) do ethical judgments perform?

4. Background continued… These responses tend to fall into two camps: –Moral Realism (or cognitivism) which asserts that moral claims are making reference to facts about the world. E.g. in the same way as saying ‘it is raining,’ the statement, ‘killing someone is wrong’ is stating a fact of the matter. –Moral Anti-Realism (non cognitivism) says that certain statements (such as religious, aesthetic and moral) are not referring to the world at all and so are not capable of being true or false in any real sense. There are no moral facts, and therefore, no moral knowledge.

5. Recap Write a definitions for the following: 1.Cognitive 2.Non-Cognitive 3.Naturalism 4.Non-Naturalisim 5.Intuitionism 6.Emotivism 7.Prescriptivism

6. Speed Dating! Sit with a partner - one of you must sit facing the whiteboard and the other facing the opposite way The first person has only 30 seconds to describe the key word(s) featured below before moving onto their next partner - your teacher will keep writing down the keyword to be explained Your keywords are: COGNITIVISM NON-COGNITIVISM NATUALISM NON-NATURALISM INTUITIONISM EMOTIVISM PRESCRIPTIVISM BOO-HURRAH REALISM ANITI-REALISM PRIMA VACIE OPEN QUESTION IS OUGHT DEBATE OBJECTIVE SUBJECTIVE

7. Review Complete your quick test review to test your understanding