Exercise Name: Number: 2.2 Exercise Theory Title: Normative Ethics
1-Theory Description Meta-ethical thinking investigates where our ethical principles come from, and what they mean. Meta-ethical answers to these questions focus on the issues of universal truths, the will of God, the role of reason in ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms themselves. We may define meta-ethics as the study of the origin and meaning of ethical concepts. When compared to normative ethics, the field of meta-ethics is the least precisely defined area of moral philosophy. This sort of thinking explores as well the connection between values, reasons for action, and human motivation. It helps us understand how moral standards might provide us with reasons to act or refrain from acting. Meta-ethics doesnt focus on what kind of acts are right or wrong. It is concentrated on the nature of goodness and badness and what it is to morally right or wrong. By meta-ethics philosophers mean a set of views about what ethics is, how it may be grounded, and why we need it. Thus an ethics may deliver certain moral judgments (such as: adult educators should not walk away from tainted deals just to keep their hands clean), while a meta-ethics offers a vision of the goals and character of ethics itself (as in: the task of ethics is to make a constructive difference in the world) such that those judgments in turn get a context and at least the beginnings of a justification (Weston, 2009, 2). Moreover, meta-ethics is the branch of knowledge that considers the foundational issues of morality, and deals especially with the nature of ethical statements. Philosophers doing meta-ethics ask vital and fundamental questions such as these: is morality merely conventional, or are there objective standards of right and wrong? How can we gain moral knowledge? Why should we be moral? Can there be a science of morality? And so on. In fact, also considered as analytical, or critical, Meta-ethical thinking is the sort of thinking that Socrates would have come to if he had been challenged to the limit in the justification of his normative judgments (Frankena, 1973, 5). In other words, meta-ethics focus on understanding and elucidation. Analyzing questions and identifying the sense and reason of actions are the main concerns. 2- Theory Application The Sinko Corp case reveals many aspects that could illustrate the different issues of the meta-ethical thinking. This sort of thinking explores the connection between values, reasons for action, and human motivation, asking how it is that moral standards might provide individuals to think ethically to the society norms. In fact, the meta-ethics is displayed throughout the letter of Mr. Bozeman who is confronted to a dilemma (he is trying to find a solution that could help him not hiring his brother-in law, Mr. Chauncey, because he finds this one incompetent for the job). Based on the ethical values and human judgment, meta-ethics is example displayed in
the strong disapproval of Mr. Bozeman when facing his moral obligations towards the pressure from his family that wants him to hire his brother in law (to Mr. Bozeman it wouldnt be fair to give an important position to Mr. Chauncey who doesnt deserve it because of his lack of responsibilities). However, if considered as the foundational issues of morality, meta-ethical thinking may involve ethical judgments that are often highly emotional. Example showed by Mr. Bozemans feelings toward his brother (he feels right to help his brother in law because of moral values or moral obligation). Ethical judgments are also rational depending on whether the cognitive appraisal that is part of emotion is done well or badly. However, these emotional judgments can be flawed by many factors such as individual convictions or other external factors. For example, even if Mr. Bozeman would like to help Mr. Chauncey, external factors and/or personal convictions (such as his brother in law incompetence or lack of judgment) dont allow him to make this important decision. 3-Theory Analysis: The issue of Meta-ethics may be complex depending on how it is being viewed. One theory within meta-ethics explains that God dictate what is right and wrong. Moral realists explain that things are good or bad independent of us. We discover morality as we come along. On the other hand, antirealists argue that human are the only one that could dictate what is right or wrong. The facts about morality are only determined by us. Other issues include the matter between cognitivism and noncognitivism. Cognitivism explains that when someone makes a moral statement, they are describing the world. For example, if an individual says killing is wrong, he/she has attributed a property of wrongness to the act of killing. The statement is being made to the world. Whether killing has that property in an objective matter, the statement is either true or false. Noncognitivists disagree with this thinking. For them, a moral statement doesnt describe the world but it could be an expression of feeling or advising others on what to do. They would also believe that the statement is neither true nor false because moral statements are not descriptive. To be true, the statement should describe something as being the way that it is, and to be false is to describe it as being other than the way it is.
References
Cline, Austin. Metaethics. Web. n.d. Retrieved Sept. 26 2010 from http://atheism.about.com/library/glossary/general/bldef_metaethic s.htm Ethics Morals. Meta-Ethics. Web. April 19, 2010. Retrieved Sept. 26 2010 from http://www.ethicsmorals.com/metaethics.html Frankena, william. "Ethics." 2nd Ed. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc, 1973. Weston, Anthony. "For a meta-ethics as good as our practice." New Directions for Adult & Continuing Education 123 (2009): 7-18. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 30 Sept. 2010.