intuitionism

Intuitionism: Is ‘good’ indefinable?

by Leave a Comment

Intuitionists think that you can't define 'good,' but that you can know basic moral truths through intuition.

NOTES

  • Good is indefinable
    • Some terms have to be this way
      • If every term were defined by other terms, then at least some would be defined in a circle
    • A1 (Moore)
      1. In a definition, the definiendum and definiens are interchangeable
      2. The definiendum 'good' is not interchangeable with any definiens
        • S1: it is always conceivable that the two are not the same
        • E.g., CR: "Good" = "socially acceptable"
          • Is it conceivable that a society accepts what's bad?
          • Yes, you could imagine them accepting anything, and something has to be bad
      3. So, 'good' is indefinable
  • Good is
    • objective
    • real
    • non-natural
  • Self-evident basic moral truths
    • Intuition
      • Not inference
        • A1: is-ought fallacy
          1. Moral reasoning must look like this:
            1. X is Y
            2. So, you ought to do X
            • E.g.,
              • Helping others is socially acceptable
              • So, you ought to help others
          3. This reasoning is invalid
            • It's always possible that (a) is true and (b) is false
          4. So, we can't know basic moral truths through inference
    • Doesn't mean you can't be wrong
      • Modus ponens is self-evident and obvious
      • Modus tollens isn't
        • If Pablo goes surfing, so will Queenie
        • Queenie doesn’t surf
        • Could Pablo go surfing?
        • If he did, then Queenie would go
        • But we just said she doesn't
      • Affirming the consequent seems self-evident, but is false
    • intuition
      • direct intellectual apprehension- we see it directly and can't be wrong
      • Alternatively, intellectual seeming- it seems to be a certain way to us, but that doesn't mean it is that way for sure
        • In the same way as perceptual seemings
  • O1: natures are discovered empirically
    • Water & H2O
    • R1: good is different
      • Concept of water is purely phenomenological, but concept of good isn't like that
  • O2: moral disagreement
    • Trolley problems
      • Switch
      • Fat man
      • Matters which order you hear them in
      • People disagree about answers
    • R1: agreement in the basics
      • Don't harm without cause
      • Just not sure in these cases what considerations outweigh which
      • O1: disagreement in basics
        • Maximize good consequences
        • Set of rules: don't kill fetuses, don't rape, etc.
  • O3: source of intuitions
    • Many moral intuitions come from society
      • See the burning widow video
    • R1: some are universal

Further Reading

G.E. Moore, "Principia Ethica"

W.D. Ross, "The Right and the Good"

H. Sidgwick, "The Methods of Ethics"

Harry J. Gensler, "Ethics: A Contemporary Introduction"