Skip to content
EntityQ17156560· pop 10· linked from 349 articles

non-cognitivism

Sign in to save

Non-cognitivism is the meta-ethical view that ethical sentences do not express propositions (i.e., statements) and thus cannot be true or false (they are not truth-apt). A noncognitivist denies the cognitivist claim that "moral judgments are capable of being objectively true, because they describe some feature of the world." If moral statements cannot be true, and if one cannot know something that is not true, non-cognitivism implies that moral knowledge is impossible.

~12 min read

Encyclopedic overview

8 sections
Contents
  • Varieties
  • Arguments in favour
  • Universal prescriptivism
  • Emotivism
  • Arguments against
  • See also
  • References
  • External links

Non-cognitivism is the meta-ethical view that ethical sentences do not express propositions (i.e., statements) and thus cannot be true or false (they are not truth-apt). A noncognitivist denies the cognitivist claim that "moral judgments are capable of being objectively true, because they describe some feature of the world." If moral statements cannot be true, and if one cannot know something that is not true, non-cognitivism implies that moral knowledge is impossible.

Non-cognitivism entails that non-cognitive attitudes underlie moral discourse and this discourse therefore consists of non-declarative speech acts, although accepting that its surface features may consistently and efficiently work as if moral discourse were cognitive. The point of interpreting moral claims as non-declarative speech acts is to explain what moral claims mean if they are neither true nor false (as philosophies such as logical positivism entail). Utterances like "Boo to killing!" and "Don't kill" are not candidates for truth or falsity, but have non-cognitive meaning.

Excerpted from Wikipedia’s “non-cognitivism” article, available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 licence.

Available in 9 languages

via Wikidata sitelinks · CC0