Imagine you’re at a party, and someone says to you:
“I LOVE that article you sent about cognitivism in metaethics, Jane. How ever did you get so brilliant?
You smile graciously, you do send a lot of kick ass articles…but you are thinking…what the hell is cognitivism? Metaethics sounds cool…but what?
Don’t worry–you would be in the mass majority, not knowing these “isms” that sound complicated but are really just about human nature and interesting when you can break through the panic at a question like…”Hey, wanna talk about cognitivism?”
It’s a fascinating concept once you realize you don’t have to be a science nerd to understand the thinking that has gone into this.
So…What IS Cognitivism in Metaethics?
At its core, cognitivism is the belief that moral statements–like “stealing is wrong” or “helping others is good”–can be true or false. It’s a part of metaethics, the branch of philosophy that explores the nature, meaning, and foundations of moral judgments.
Think of it this way: When someone says, “Stealing is wrong,” a cognitivist believes that this statement is making a factual claim about the world. This claim can be either true or false, much like the statement “The earth orbits the sun.” Cognitivists argue that moral statements express beliefs about objective facts, not just opinions or emotions.
Famous Thinkers Behind Cognitivism
Several philosophers have contributed to the development of cognitivism. Let’s briefly look at a few:
G.E. Moore:
Moore is often credited with shaping modern metaethics. In his book “Principa Ethica,” Moore argued that moral properties are real and can be known through intuition, a view closely related to cognitivism.
David Hume:
Although Hume is known for his idea that “you cannot drive an ‘ought’ from an ‘is,'” his work laid the groundwork for debates in metaethics. Cognitivists have responded to his views by arguing that moral statements can indeed be factual.
A.J. Ayer:
Ayer was a prominent figure in the debate on whether moral language expresses emotions or factual statements. Though he opposed cognitivism by advocating for emotivism (the idea that moral statements only express emotions), his work helped clarify the cognitivist position by contrast.
Immanuel Kant:
Kant’s ethical theory, which emphasizes the role of rationality in moral judgments, is another significant influence. Kant believed that moral laws are universal truths accessible through reason, aligning with the cognitivist view that moral claims are truth-apt.
Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism
To fully grasp cognitivism, it helps to understand its opposite: non-cognitivism. Non-cognitivists argue that moral statements don’t express beliefs that can be true or false. Instead, they think moral language is about expressing emotions, commanding others, or stating preferences.
For example, a non-cognitivist might say that “Stealing is wrong” is more like saying “Boo to stealing!”–an expression of disapproval rather than a factual claim.
Why Cognitivism Matters–Maybe
It’s a terrible word to spell. Spell check hates it. Why read more about it?
Understanding cognitivism is crucial for anyone interested in ethics and morality. It shapes how we think about moral debates at a foundational level. If moral statements are factual, we can argue about them logically and try to discover objective moral truths. But if they’re just expressions of feeling, then moral disagreements might be more about clashing attitudes than about discovering the truth.
Enjoyable Debate
I dislike the modern view of a debate. But I envy the ancient greeks and the subsequent philosophers their debates. This is one that is interesting to see the division within.
Next time you are out and someone brings up cognitivism…you’re welcome. If that never happens, maybe it will be a trivia question? Or maybe it’s the topic that draws you in to further study of the mind…any of these scenarios is a win. But the last, is my favorite.
Once you dip into philosophy you start to more broadly define yourself. You start to think “Which am I?” A Cognivist or a a Non-Cognitist? And what does that mean to the foundations of my belief system?
And that’s fun. For people who enjoy the study of the mind, anyway, which I assume you do if you are still reading this article.
Thought Prompt to continue study: Cognitivism is all about seeing moral statements as beliefs that can be true or false, with a rich history of philosophical debate behind it.
Let your brain puzzle through metaethics. It will teach you about yourself.