Ethical naturalism

A meta-ethical theory, unlike a normative ethical theory, does not contain any ethical evaluations. An answer to any of the five example questions above would not itself be an ethical statement. The major meta-ethical views are commonly divided into realist and anti-realist views: Moral realism holds that there are objective values. Realists believe that evaluative statements are factual claims, which are either true or false, and that their truth or falsity does not depend on our beliefs, feelings, or other ...

See also:

Meta-ethics, Meta-ethics - Meta-ethical questions, Meta-ethics - Meta-ethical theories, Meta-ethics - History

Read more here: » Meta-ethics: Encyclopedia II - Meta-ethics - Meta-ethical theories

"Naturalism" refers to a number of different topics: Naturalism (philosophy) is any of several philosophical stances which do not claim that phenomena or hypotheses commonly labeled as supernatural necessarily do not exist or are wrong, but insist that they are not inherently different from natural phenomena or hypotheses, and that both supernatural and natural phenomena and hypotheses can be studied by the same methods. Methodological naturalism assumes that observable events in nature are explained only by natu ...

Read more here: » Naturalism: Encyclopedia - Naturalism

Some think that in the 20th and 21st centuries meta-ethics has come to replace normative ethics as the more prevalent pursuit among academic philosophers. This is supposed to have occurred simultaneously with an overall decline in belief in moral absolutes in most popular cultures as well as a greater interest in process and categorization as opposed to the identification and application of norms, both in academia and in ...

See also:

Meta-ethics, Meta-ethics - Meta-ethical questions, Meta-ethics - Meta-ethical theories, Meta-ethics - History

Read more here: » Meta-ethics: Encyclopedia II - Meta-ethics - History

Ethical naturalism and non-naturalism are subcategories of cognitivism, which holds that ethical statements express propositions. Naturalism is the view that such statements can be further reduced to non-ethical statements; non-naturalism is the view that they cannot. According to G. E. Moore, "Goodness is a simple, undefinable, non-natural property." To call goodness "non-natural" does not mean that it is supernatural or divine. It does mean, however, that goodness cannot be reduced to natural properties such as needs, wants or pleas ...

See also:

Ethical non-naturalism, Ethical non-naturalism - Definitions and examples, Ethical non-naturalism - A difficult question, Ethical non-naturalism - Another argument for non-naturalism

Read more here: » Ethical non-naturalism: Encyclopedia II - Ethical non-naturalism - Definitions and examples

Moore did not consider goodness and rightness to be natural properties, i.e., they cannot be defined in terms of any natural properties. How, then, can we know that anything is good and how can we distinguish good from bad? Moral epistemology, the part of epistemology (and/or ethics) that studies how we know moral facts and how moral beliefs are justified, has proposed an answer. British epistemologists, following Moore, suggested that humans have a special faculty, a faculty of moral i ...

See also:

Ethical non-naturalism, Ethical non-naturalism - Definitions and examples, Ethical non-naturalism - A difficult question, Ethical non-naturalism - Another argument for non-naturalism

Read more here: » Ethical non-naturalism: Encyclopedia II - Ethical non-naturalism - A difficult question