This post was written by Matt Bazemore on April 30, 2007
In my previous entry we were left with two major positions concerning ethics: Moral Realism and Moral Irrealism. Today we will examine how Moral Irrealism analyzes the meaning of moral statements.
Moral Irrealism makes a distinction between descriptive and evaluative meaning that is found in every statement of value, such as “That is cruel.� Descriptive meaning refers to the meaning that is not dependent upon any particular perspective. In other words, multiple people could agree with its meaning, because something external to the speaker is being described.
Evaluative meaning is dependent upon a particular perspective, i.e. multiple people would have differences about the same thing, such as the taste of a particular dish. This distinction of meaning is grounded in what is called the absolute conception of the world. When Christians hear the word, “absolute� in relation to ethics, their usual response is gladness. Celebrations would be premature in this case, as will soon become evident.
The absolute conception seeks a description of reality not dependent upon any particular perspective. This is related to scientific methodology. Science seeks to provide us with a picture of the world that is independent of any particular perspective. As scientists study the world they do not find qualities such as “goodness� and so conclude that values are of appearance and not reality. Thus, the absolute conception places objective qualities in reality, and subjective qualities in appearance.
The Moral Irrealist can affirm as actually existing in reality only those qualities that science deems descriptive, and not evaluative. Evaluative qualities, while perhaps containing or causing a high level of emotive content, do not really refer to anything outside of the person who is making an observation. They can’t – “good� and “bad� aren’t really “there�.
The success and prevalence of the scientific worldview adds much weight to the Moral Irrealist position. But if Moral Irrealism is true, then moral truth is impossible. This implies that those who find the recent shootings at Virginia Tech horrifying are feeling an affective response to an opinion and not the truth of the situation. Despite this rather damning implication however, the Moral Realist still needs to provide a response to the absolute conception.
Part 1 Part 3
|
