'What is the difference between ethical naturalism and non-naturalism's account of moral language?'

The difference between ethical naturalism and non-naturalism is a difference between the definiton of a moral fact. Ethical naturalism purports to explain ethical langague in terms of fact-stating semantics that correspond with the natural world. Such that, the statement 'killing is wrong' is deemed verifiable upon a epistemological corresponance with the external world; the fact that killing is in fact wrong. Whereas, ethical non-naturalism asserts that, albeit there are moral facts and that they have truth-value, they nontheless have a unique ontological and epistemic status. For instance, Moore argues that these are 'intuitions' of a moral agency. Thus, the statement 'killing is wrong' is verifiable upon the basis of one's intution. Hence, the difference between these two accounts is upon the definition of a moral fact.

Answered by Charlie M. Philosophy tutor


See similar Philosophy A Level tutors

Related Philosophy A Level answers

All answers ▸

What is act utilitarianism?

What is the objection from the problem of evil to the existence of God?

Explain the difference between analytic and ontological reduction

Mill’s Harm Principle rules out the exercise of political power for the purpose of protecting people from harming themselves. Is Mill right in thinking that such exercises of power are wrong? In your answer, discuss Mill’s argument for this claim.

We're here to help

contact us iconContact usWhatsapp logoMessage us on Whatsapptelephone icon+44 (0) 203 773 6020
Facebook logoInstagram logoLinkedIn logo

© MyTutorWeb Ltd 2013–2023

Terms & Conditions|Privacy Policy