Table of Contents

Excelsior College Ethics Exam Study Guide Home
I. Theory
A. Basic theories
B. Basic concepts
C. Metaethics
D. Moral deliberation
II. Practice
Sources

I. Theory
A. Basic theories
B. Basic concepts

3. Metaethics
   1. Subjectivism/objectivism
   2. Value theory
   3. Genealogical
   4. Skepticism/nihilism and the naturalistic fallacy

      David Hume explained that the naturalistic fallacy is when we confuse what is with what ought to be. Just because certain events or actions exist does not mean that they are morally correct.

   5. Metaethics is the group of problems that deal with how we study ethics. For example, instead of asking if something is good or bad, we ask what it means for something to be good or bad.
   6. Any system of ethics that ultimately relies on rules is a type of normative ethics. The root of the word normative means “rule”.
   7. We consider metaethics a type of nonnormative ethics. Descriptive ethics is another nonnormative ethic that simply tries to describe ethical behavior and beliefs.
   8. An argument is a statement of belief along with its supporting evidence.
   9. An assumption is a portion of argument that is either not stated (it is assumed) or is assumed to be true in the context of the argument.
   10. An axiological theory of morality equates moral judgments with value judgments. For example, if you say that something is morally correct because it does something good, then you are promoting an axiological view. To contrast, deontological theories are not axiological. They do not make any type of value judgment.
   11. Cognitivism states:
       1. Moral language describes real events,
       2. Moral claims are either true or false, and
       3. We can and do have moral knowledge.

4. Moral deliberation
   1. Moral reasoning
      1. A slippery slope argument attempts to show that something is bad because it might eventually lead to something else that is obviously bad. For example, someone might say, “If we pass a law prohibiting assault rifles, then eventually we will pass laws banning all types of guns.” We consider this argument logically false. To be a valid argument, it is necessary to demonstrate how one action inevitably leads to the final consequence.
      2. The straw man argument is another logically false argument. If you distort someone else’s position and then attack that position, then you are attacking the straw man. For example, some people that supported the war in Iraq accused people who opposed the war of supporting Saddam Hussein.
      3. When someone presents only two options as the solutions to a problem, then they are presenting a false dilemma.
      4. It is widely believed that humans have a free will – that they can make decisions based on moral principles. We call this autonomy.

   2. Implications of moral concepts
   3. Status of moral judgments (self-interest, immediate self-interest)
   4. Why be moral?

⇒ Next section

Liked it? Take a second to support Hunter Hogan on Patreon!