C L Stevenson: the Emotive Meaning of Ethical Terms

question 32

Multiple Choice

C. L. Stevenson: The Emotive Meaning of Ethical Terms
Stevenson claims that before we can hope to answer ethical questions, we must first try to understand exactly what is being asked. In light of this, he examines the question: what does it mean to call something good? According to interest theories, to say that something is good is simply to say that it is approved of or desired, either by the speaker or by some group of people. Stevenson denies that such theories can fully capture what it means to call something good, and sets out to provide a more satisfying theory. He claims that any such theory must account for three things: (i) people may sensibly disagree about what is good, (ii) goodness has a "magnetism" in that judgments about goodness motivate us to act, and (iii) claims about goodness are not empirically verifiable. Stevenson believes his theory, emotivism, meets these requirements. According to emotivism, ethical claims are not simply attempts to describe the world, but are primarily used to influence others. As Stevenson puts the point, "ethical terms are instruments used in the complicated interplay and readjustment of human interests."
Stevenson maintains that ethical terms have emotive meanings, in the sense that they tend to produce affective responses in people. We use these emotive meanings to try to influence others to approve or disapprove of certain things. Thus, on Stevenson's view, to claim that something is good is both to express one's own approval of the thing, as well as to encourage one's audience to join in approving of it. Moral disagreements are therefore not mere disagreements in belief, in which one person believes a proposition and the other one disbelieves it. Rather, in ethical disagreements, one person has a favorable attitude toward something, whereas the other has an unfavorable attitude, and neither is content to let the other's attitude remain.
-According to Stevenson, empirical methods:

• A) are never useful in resolving ethical disagreement.
• B) are sometimes useful in resolving ethical disagreement, but are not always sufficient.
• C) are in principle always sufficient for resolving ethical disagreement.
• D) provide the only responsible way to engage in moral philosophy.

---

Definitions:

Market

A place or system where buyers and sellers interact to trade goods, services, or resources.

Factor Market

A marketplace for the services of a factor of production (such as labor, capital, or land), where these services are bought and sold.

Households

Units of individuals living together, making economic decisions as a single entity, often a family or people sharing living space.

Positive Statement

A factual assertion about how the world actually works, which can be tested and validated.