What do moral words like 'good' mean: do they describe natural facts, point to a non-natural property known by intuition, or merely express our feelings?
Component 02 Meta-ethics: ethical naturalism, intuitionism (Moore and the naturalistic fallacy) and emotivism (Ayer and Stevenson), and the cognitive and non-cognitive divide.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to meta-ethics. Covers ethical naturalism, Moore's intuitionism and the naturalistic fallacy and open-question argument, and the emotivism of Ayer and Stevenson, with the cognitive and non-cognitive divide and the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
OCR Component 02 turns from normative ethics (which acts are right) to meta-ethics: the study of what moral language means and whether moral claims can be true. The key divide is cognitive (moral statements state facts and are true or false) versus non-cognitive (they do not state facts but express something else). You study three positions: ethical naturalism (cognitive), intuitionism (Moore, cognitive but non-natural) and emotivism (Ayer and Stevenson, non-cognitive). The exam rewards explaining each precisely and then evaluating which best accounts for moral language.
The answer
The cognitive and non-cognitive divide
Ethical naturalism
Moore's intuitionism and the naturalistic fallacy
Emotivism: Ayer and Stevenson
Examples in context
Try this
Q1. "Moral statements are nothing more than expressions of emotion." Discuss. [40 marks]
- What the marker wants. An AO2 essay weighing emotivism (Ayer, Stevenson) against cognitivist alternatives (naturalism, Moore's intuitionism), judging whether ethics states facts or expresses attitudes. AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15.
Q2. Assess whether Moore is right that "good" cannot be defined. [40 marks]
- Cue. Moore's open-question argument and the naturalistic fallacy claim good is a simple non-natural property. Weigh this against the water and H2O reply that identity need not be synonymy, and judge.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of OCR exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
OCR H573/02 2017 (style)20 marksAssess the view that ethical terms such as 'good' are meaningful. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)Show worked answer →
A 40-mark Component 02 essay on the six-level scheme (AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15). Explaining the positions earns AO1; the higher levels reward judging whether ethical terms have meaning.
Explain (AO1). Naturalism says moral terms describe natural facts (good means, for example, what maximises happiness), so ethical claims are true or false. Moore's intuitionism says good is a simple, non-natural property known by intuition, and that defining it in natural terms commits the naturalistic fallacy. Emotivism (Ayer, Stevenson) says moral terms express feelings, not facts.
Evaluate (AO2). Naturalism makes ethics objective but faces the open-question argument; intuitionism keeps objectivity but cannot resolve disagreement between intuitions; emotivism explains moral disagreement and motivation but seems to reduce ethics to "boo and hurrah".
Judge. A top answer decides whether ethical terms are cognitive (fact-stating) or non-cognitive, and defends the verdict.
OCR H573/02 2020 (style)20 marksCritically assess emotivism as an account of ethical language. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)Show worked answer →
A levels-of-response essay testing AO1 understanding of emotivism and AO2 evaluation of it.
Explain. Ayer holds moral statements are neither analytic nor verifiable, so they are not fact-stating; they merely express the speaker's emotions ("stealing is wrong" expresses disapproval, the "boo-hurrah" theory). Stevenson develops this: moral language also aims to persuade and report attitudes, giving it a dynamic, attitudinal element.
Evaluate. Strengths: it explains why moral disagreement is so persistent and why moral judgements motivate action. Weaknesses: it seems to make moral debate irrational and reduce ethics to taste, and Stevenson's persuasion element struggles to distinguish good reasons from mere pressure.
Judge. A high-level answer weighs whether emotivism captures or distorts moral language, and reaches a justified conclusion.
Related dot points
- Component 02 Kantian ethics: the good will and duty, the categorical imperative and its three formulations (universal law, ends in themselves, kingdom of ends), and the summum bonum, with strengths and weaknesses.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to Kantian ethics. Covers the good will and acting from duty, the categorical imperative and its three formulations (universal law, ends in themselves, the kingdom of ends), and the summum bonum with the postulates of freedom, immortality and God, plus the strengths, weaknesses and AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 02 Utilitarianism: Bentham's hedonic calculus, Mill's higher and lower pleasures and harm principle, and the contrast between act and rule utilitarianism, with strengths and weaknesses.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to utilitarianism. Covers Bentham's principle of utility and hedonic calculus, Mill's qualitative distinction between higher and lower pleasures, the contrast between act and rule utilitarianism, and the strengths and weaknesses (calculation, the tyranny of the majority, justice) the exam asks you to evaluate.
- Component 02 Conscience: Aquinas's theological account (ratio, synderesis, conscientia) and Freud's psychological account (the super-ego and guilt), with the contrast between conscience as reason and conscience as a construct.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to conscience. Covers Aquinas's account of conscience as reason (ratio, synderesis, conscientia, vincible and invincible ignorance) and Freud's account of conscience as the super-ego producing guilt, with the contrast and the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 02 Free will and moral responsibility: hard determinism, libertarianism and compatibilism (soft determinism), the influence of religious ideas of predestination, and the implications for moral responsibility, praise, blame and punishment.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to free will and moral responsibility. Covers hard determinism, libertarianism and compatibilism (soft determinism), the influence of religious predestination, and the consequences for moral responsibility, praise, blame and punishment, with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 01 Issues in religious language (twentieth-century perspectives): the verification principle (Ayer), the falsification debate (Flew, Hare and Mitchell) and Wittgenstein's language games.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to twentieth-century perspectives on religious language. Covers Ayer's verification principle, the falsification debate between Flew, Hare and Mitchell, and Wittgenstein's language games, weighing whether God-talk is meaningful, cognitive or non-cognitive, with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Sources & how we know this
- OCR A Level Religious Studies (H573) specification — OCR (2016)
- G. E. Moore, Principia Ethica — Project Gutenberg (1903)