Utilitarianism is a normative ethical view, not a meta-ethical view. I’m a utilitarian and a realist. One can be a utilitarian and adopt any meta-ethical view.
Utilitarianism is a normative ethical view, not a meta-ethical view
Of course not. It’s a form of consequentialism , so it’s metaethics. But it’s incomplete metaethics...it doesn’t specify realism versus anti realism.but, but it does specify other things.
That’s true, but consequentialism, deontology, etc. are typically categorized as normative ethical theories, while claims like “don’t kill” are treated as first-order normative moral claims.
The term “metaethics” is typically used to refer to abstract issues about the nature of morality, e.g., whether there are moral facts. It is pretty much standard in contemporary moral philosophy to refer to consequentialism as a normative moral theory, not a metaethical one.
I don’t think there are correct or incorrect definitions, but describing consequentialism as a metaethical view is at least unconventional from the standpoint of how these terms are used in contemporary moral philosophy.
Utilitarianism is a normative ethical view, not a meta-ethical view. I’m a utilitarian and a realist. One can be a utilitarian and adopt any meta-ethical view.
Of course not. It’s a form of consequentialism , so it’s metaethics. But it’s incomplete metaethics...it doesn’t specify realism versus anti realism.but, but it does specify other things.
Can you elaborate? Why is it a metaethical position because it’s a form of consequentialism?
Consequentialism, deontology etc are broad claims about ethics that aren’t object level ethics , like “thou shalt not kill”.
That’s true, but consequentialism, deontology, etc. are typically categorized as normative ethical theories, while claims like “don’t kill” are treated as first-order normative moral claims.
The term “metaethics” is typically used to refer to abstract issues about the nature of morality, e.g., whether there are moral facts. It is pretty much standard in contemporary moral philosophy to refer to consequentialism as a normative moral theory, not a metaethical one.
I don’t think there are correct or incorrect definitions, but describing consequentialism as a metaethical view is at least unconventional from the standpoint of how these terms are used in contemporary moral philosophy.