Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism

Definition

Cognitivism and non-cognitivism are two opposing theories in ethics regarding the nature of moral statements. Cognitivism holds that moral statements are capable of being true or false because they express beliefs or propositions about the world, while non-cognitivism argues that moral statements do not have truth values and instead express emotional attitudes or prescriptions. This fundamental divide informs discussions on subjectivism and moral skepticism by influencing how we understand the truth conditions of moral claims.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Cognitivism asserts that moral claims can be evaluated as true or false, which means there are objective criteria for determining moral correctness.
2. Non-cognitivists argue that when people make moral judgments, they are not stating facts but rather expressing feelings, attitudes, or commands.
3. Subjectivism aligns more closely with non-cognitivist perspectives, suggesting that what is considered 'right' or 'wrong' is rooted in personal beliefs and experiences.
4. Moral skepticism challenges both cognitivism and non-cognitivism by questioning whether we can have any justified beliefs about moral truths at all.
5. The debate between cognitivism and non-cognitivism is central to understanding different ethical theories and their implications for moral discourse and practice.

Review Questions

• How do cognitivism and non-cognitivism differ in their understanding of moral statements?
  • Cognitivism posits that moral statements can be true or false because they represent beliefs about the world, while non-cognitivism contends that these statements do not have truth values. Instead, non-cognitivists believe that moral claims express emotions or attitudes rather than factual information. This distinction affects how we interpret the nature of morality and the basis for making ethical judgments.
• What implications does the debate between cognitivism and non-cognitivism have for subjectivist theories of ethics?
  • The debate impacts subjectivist theories by suggesting that if morality is subjective, it aligns more closely with non-cognitivist views, where moral truths depend on individual feelings or societal norms. Cognitivists would argue against this by emphasizing the possibility of objective moral truths that exist independently of personal beliefs. Understanding this relationship helps clarify how ethical theories approach the validity of moral claims.
• Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of cognitivism compared to non-cognitivism in addressing moral skepticism.
  • Cognitivism provides a robust framework for asserting the existence of objective moral truths, which can counteract moral skepticism by offering criteria for evaluating ethical claims. However, it can struggle to address cultural variations in morality. Non-cognitivism, while highlighting the emotional and prescriptive aspects of morality, may fail to convince skeptics who seek objective standards. An effective evaluation must consider how each theory addresses the challenges posed by skepticism while recognizing their respective limitations.

Related terms

Moral Realism:

The view that there are objective moral facts and truths that exist independently of individual beliefs or attitudes.

Emotivism:

A non-cognitivist theory suggesting that moral statements express emotional reactions rather than describe states of affairs.

Subjectivism: The philosophical position that moral truths are dependent on individual perspectives or cultural contexts.