Fact Check: Ethics is not moral, metaethics is.

Fact-Check Article: "Ethics is not moral, metaethics is."

What We Know

The claim that "Ethics is not moral, metaethics is" touches on the distinctions between ethics, morality, and metaethics. According to the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ethics is often understood as a branch of philosophy that deals with moral principles and what is considered right or wrong. It encompasses both normative ethics, which prescribes how one ought to act, and applied ethics, which applies these principles to real-world situations.

Metaethics, on the other hand, is defined as the branch of analytic philosophy that explores the status, foundations, and scope of moral values, properties, and words. It focuses on understanding what morality itself is, rather than prescribing moral actions or behaviors (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). This distinction is crucial: while ethics deals with moral questions and frameworks, metaethics examines the underlying nature and meaning of those moral concepts.

Furthermore, the Lander University Philosophy Department clarifies that metaethics is concerned with elucidating the meaning of ethical terms and comparing ethical theories, which further emphasizes its role as a second-order inquiry into morality rather than a direct engagement with moral issues.

Analysis

The claim that "Ethics is not moral, metaethics is" can be interpreted in a few ways. First, it suggests a separation between ethics (as a normative discipline) and morality (as a descriptive concept). This interpretation is supported by the definitions provided in the sources, which indicate that ethics involves normative judgments about right and wrong, while metaethics investigates the nature of those judgments.

However, the claim may also imply that ethics lacks moral substance, which is misleading. Ethics is inherently tied to moral considerations, as it provides the frameworks through which moral questions are addressed. Thus, while metaethics does not engage directly with moral prescriptions, it does not negate the moral dimensions of ethics itself.

The reliability of the sources used in this analysis is generally high. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy are well-respected academic resources, widely used in philosophical discourse. The Lander University Philosophy Department also provides a clear and educational overview of the distinctions between ethics and metaethics, further supporting the analysis.

Conclusion

The claim "Ethics is not moral, metaethics is" is Partially True. While it accurately reflects the distinction between ethics and metaethics—where ethics deals with moral principles and metaethics examines the nature of those principles—it risks oversimplifying the relationship between the two. Ethics is fundamentally moral in nature, as it seeks to understand and prescribe moral behavior. Therefore, while metaethics is indeed a separate field focused on the analysis of moral concepts, it does not imply that ethics is devoid of moral significance.