“Moral truths are self-evident.”
Intuitionism is a cognitive theory proposed by G.E Moore arguing that ‘good’ is
self-evident and that we don’t need rules to establish moral truths like
naturalism suggests. However, like naturalism, intuitionism asserts that there
is a moral law within us and is therefore subject to the empirical criticism that
there is too much moral disagreement in the world. This is where Ayer’s
emotivism is important by arguing that there is no real ‘good’ as moral
statements can’t be synthetically or analytically verified. Whilst emotivism runs
into its own problems, it coherently shows that for the most part, good is not
self-evident.
G.E Moore begins his theory with his open-question argument to critique
naturalism, asking whether questions regarding pleasure following a utilitarian
approach are truly closed questions. He argues that moral statements do not
need to be verified as good is self-evident. He likens good to the colour yellow
as it cannot be described or broken into pieces, but it is self-evident. W.D
Ross agrees that the mature person just ‘knows’ moral truths and he
expresses this with his prima facie duties. This includes fidelity in which we
make promises and aim to keep them, or reparation where we make amends
for our mistakes. He contends that we know when to prioritise which duty in
moral situations. However, intuitionism assumes that we can never make an
error accidentally and this is especially incoherent when looking at Ross’ duty
of reparation as why would we need to make amends if we always know what
is good? This goes to show that intuitionism projects a perfect image of
human nature onto humanity and its impracticality reveals that intuitionism is
at least somewhat incorrect in stating that good is self-evident.
Naturalists would argue that intuitionists distance themselves from cognitive
thinking - that moral truths are objective - too much despite being a cognitive
theory. Instead, naturalism states that good is objective as moral statements
can be analytically or empirically verified. To say ‘Keir Starmer is the Prime
Minister of the UK’ has just as much factual quality as saying ‘the war in
Russia is bad’ just one is analytically proven and the other is synthetically
proven by looking around the world. Naturalism also has more strength in its
application to ethical theories. It aligns with the moral law in natural law that
reveals we have reason to work out ‘good’ in order to reach our telos. It
coincides with Kantian ethics on the concept of universalisation - that moral
truths can be universalised. It also goes part of the way with teleological
theory utilitarianism by blending synthetic statements with the concept of
Intuitionism is a cognitive theory proposed by G.E Moore arguing that ‘good’ is
self-evident and that we don’t need rules to establish moral truths like
naturalism suggests. However, like naturalism, intuitionism asserts that there
is a moral law within us and is therefore subject to the empirical criticism that
there is too much moral disagreement in the world. This is where Ayer’s
emotivism is important by arguing that there is no real ‘good’ as moral
statements can’t be synthetically or analytically verified. Whilst emotivism runs
into its own problems, it coherently shows that for the most part, good is not
self-evident.
G.E Moore begins his theory with his open-question argument to critique
naturalism, asking whether questions regarding pleasure following a utilitarian
approach are truly closed questions. He argues that moral statements do not
need to be verified as good is self-evident. He likens good to the colour yellow
as it cannot be described or broken into pieces, but it is self-evident. W.D
Ross agrees that the mature person just ‘knows’ moral truths and he
expresses this with his prima facie duties. This includes fidelity in which we
make promises and aim to keep them, or reparation where we make amends
for our mistakes. He contends that we know when to prioritise which duty in
moral situations. However, intuitionism assumes that we can never make an
error accidentally and this is especially incoherent when looking at Ross’ duty
of reparation as why would we need to make amends if we always know what
is good? This goes to show that intuitionism projects a perfect image of
human nature onto humanity and its impracticality reveals that intuitionism is
at least somewhat incorrect in stating that good is self-evident.
Naturalists would argue that intuitionists distance themselves from cognitive
thinking - that moral truths are objective - too much despite being a cognitive
theory. Instead, naturalism states that good is objective as moral statements
can be analytically or empirically verified. To say ‘Keir Starmer is the Prime
Minister of the UK’ has just as much factual quality as saying ‘the war in
Russia is bad’ just one is analytically proven and the other is synthetically
proven by looking around the world. Naturalism also has more strength in its
application to ethical theories. It aligns with the moral law in natural law that
reveals we have reason to work out ‘good’ in order to reach our telos. It
coincides with Kantian ethics on the concept of universalisation - that moral
truths can be universalised. It also goes part of the way with teleological
theory utilitarianism by blending synthetic statements with the concept of
