EMOTIVISM

Thesis: Morality is simply an expression of one’s preference

and emotions.

Material: Chapter 13: Ayer and Emotivism pp. 216-219

Cengage Advantage Ethics: Discovering Right and Wrong

Author: Louis Pojman

Link: https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781305856783
 Brief introduction on Emotivism
Who is the founder of the theory of Who was Sir A. J. Ayer and what did
emotivism? he do?

• The English philosopher A.J. Ayer • Sir A. J. Ayer, in full Sir Alfred Jules
(1910 – 1989) and the American Ayer, (born October 29, 1910, London,
philosopher Charles Stevenson (1908 – England—died June 27, 1989,
1979) developed a different version of London), British philosopher, educator
subjectivism. and a leading representative of logical
positivism through his widely read
• Emotivism is a theory that claims that work Language, Truth, and Logic
moral language or judgments: 1) are (1936).
neither true or false; 2) express our
emotions; and 3) try to influence • was influenced both by Hume’s and
others to agree with us. Moore’s presentation of the fact–value
problem.

reasonandmeaning.com/2016/11/26/emotivism/
www.britannica.com/biography/A-J-Ayer
Hume and Moore each showed two things: 1st they explained why there
is a fact–value problem; 2nd, they offered solutions to the problem by
showing what moral value really is.

• For Hume, the problem • For Moore, the problem

involves the fallacy of involves the naturalistic
deriving ought from is, and fallacy, and his solution
his solution is that moral involves intuitively
value rests on emotional recognizing moral goodness
reactions. within things.
Ayer also takes this two-pronged approach: 1st, he argues that the fact–
value problem arises because moral statements cannot pass a critical test
of meaning called the verification principle; 2nd, expanding on Hume, his
solution is that moral utterances are only expressions of feelings, a
position called emotivism.

• What do we mean when we say, “stealing is wrong”?

• Is morality objective or subjective (up to me)?

• Is morality a natural feature of the world (naturalism)?

• The fact-value: Can I make a prescriptive statement “I ought” from a

descriptive statement?
 Ayer’s Theory

• the Verification Principle, where a group of philosophers called

the “Logical Positivists” believed that the meaning of a
sentence is found in its method of verification.

• Based on that test, all meaningful sentences must be either (a)

Tautologies - statements that are true by definition and of the
form “A is A” or reducible to such statements or (b) Empirically
verifiable - statements regarding observations about the world,
such as “The book is red”.
 What about value statements such as “Charity is good”, etc.?

• Based on the test, they are meaningless because they are either tautologies or
verifiable statements.
 It is not true that “charity is good”, and there is no way to empirically
verify whether “charity is good”.

• Ayer makes his point about the meaninglessness of value utterances and his
solution to the fact–value problem is that moral utterances function in a special
nonfactual way such as “Charity is good” express one's positive feelings about
charity in much the same way as if we shouted out “Charity—hooray!”

• His argument is essentially this: (1) A sentence is meaningful if and only if it

can be verified. (2) Moral sentences cannot be verified. (3) Therefore, moral
sentences are not meaningful.

• Thus, there is a fact–value problem insofar as moral utterances fail the

verification test and are not factual statements.
• Emotivism, therefore, is the view that moral utterances merely
express our feelings.

• Ayer emphasizes moral utterances don’t even report our feelings; they
just express our feelings. Here’s the difference:
 Reported feeling: “Charity is good” means “I have positive feelings
about charity.”
 Expressed feeling: “Charity is good” means “Charity—hooray!”

• Philosophers introduced two terms to distinguish between factual

and nonfactual utterances:
 When a statement has factual content, it is cognitive [meaning to
know or 'cognize' its truth value-whether true or false].
 When a statement lacks factual content, it is non-cognitive
[meaning no truth value].
• How four traditional theories would give a cognitivist
interpretation of the moral utterance “Charity is good”

• Egoism: Charity maximizes self-interest.

• Utilitarianism: Charity maximizes general pleasure.

• Kantianism: Charity is a rational duty.

• Virtue theory: Charity promotes human flourishing.

 For Ayer.…

• all these cognitivist theories are • his account of emotivism directly

misguided attacks many cherished assumptions
about morality.
 We typically think that moral
• because moral utterances like utterances are factually
“Charity is good” do not pass the meaningful— not so to him.
test for meaning by the  We typically think that morality
verification principle; they cannot involves some use of our
be cognitive. reasoning ability—again, not so
for him.

• the content that they have is only • what’s most unsettling about Ayer’s
non-cognitive and takes the form theory is its implication that ethical
of expressing our feelings. disagreement is fundamentally a
disagreement in attitude.
 Criticisms on Emotivism

1. …that the verification theory of meaning based on Ayer’s

emotivism was founded, had serious problems; specifically, it did
not pass its own test. In brief, the Verification Principle: “A statement
is meaningful if and only if it is either tautological or empirically
verifiable.”

 Q: Is the verification principle itself either tautological or

empirically verifiable?

 A: The answer is that it is not, which means that the verification

principle is meaningless. If that’s the case, then we are not obliged
to use the verification principle as a test for moral utterances. The
rest of Ayer’s emotivism analysis of morality thus falls apart.
 3. morality seems deeper than mere
2. there is a problem with the emotions or acting on feelings or
emotivist's view that ethical attitudes. Moral judgments are
universalizable: “If it is wrong for
disagreements are
anyone to steal, then it is wrong
fundamentally disagreements for anyone relevantly similar to Jill
in attitude; specifically, this to steal.”
blurs an important distinction  Emotivism reduces morality to
between having reasons for isolated emotive expressions or
changing attitudes and having attitudes that don’t apply
causes that change our universally. It makes more
attitudes. sense to see morality as a
 Example a debate on the function of applying principles
such as “It is wrong to steal,”
abortion issue.
which has a universal element.
 In summary,

• Ayer’s version of emotivism is rather extreme, and it is no

surprise that it creates so many problems.

• Charles Leslie Stevenson [1908-1979] proposed a more

moderate version of emotivism in his book Ethics and
Language (1944) wherein he….
 agrees that moral utterances have an emotive component
that is non-cognitive,
 argues that moral utterances sometimes have cognitive
elements, too,
 says that moral utterances are so complex that we cannot
give a specific pattern that applies to all moral utterances all
the time.
 • Nevertheless, a typical moral utterance like
“Charity is good” might have these specific
components:

 Emotive expression (non-cognitive): “Charity—hooray!”

 Report about feelings (cognitive): “I approve of charity.”

 Description of other qualities (cognitive): “Charity has

qualities or relations X, Y, and Z” (for example, reduces
suffering, reduces social inequality).
• Stevenson’s suggestion is reasonable.

 If we are unhappy with Ayer’s extreme emotivism, we

can still accept that there are some non-cognitive
emotive elements to moral utterances.

 Indeed, considering how frequently emotion enters

our moral evaluations, such as the opening example
from the Weblog, we will want to recognize at least a
more limited role of emotive expressions within moral
discussions.
https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/reader/books/9781305856783/
 Q[M1]

• Synchronous class on November 26, 2021 [Friday] or

November 27, 2021 [Saturday]

• Coverage: Universalism & Relativism

• Type: Objective

• No. of Items: 30

This quiz will open and end during your regular class
schedule.
 Assigned Reading
[M1-Wk 4]

1.4 Moral Dilemmas

a. What constitutes a moral dilemma?

Material: Moral Dilemmas by Terrance McConnell
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Link: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-dilemmas/

b.
Ethical Reasoning and Arguments pp. 9-11
Example of classic, modern, and everyday moral dilemmas
Material: Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues
Author: Barbara MacKinnon
Link: https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781337515443