Metaethics

by Andrew Fisher

Do moral facts exist? What would they be like if they did? What does it mean to say that a moral claim is true? What is the link between moral judgement and motivation? Can we know whether something is right and wrong? Is morality a fiction?

An Introduction presents a very clear and engaging survey of the key concepts and positions in what has become one of the most exciting and influential fields of philosophy. Free from technicality and jargon, the book covers the main ideas that have shaped metaethics from the work of G. E. Moore to the latest thinking.

Written specifically for beginning students, the book assumes no prior philosophical knowledge. The book highlights ways to avoid common errors, offers hints and tips on learning the subject, includes a glossary of core terms, and provides guidance for further study.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Education

200 pages, Hardcover

First published August 23, 2011

Reviews

[Richard Newton · Rating 5 out of 5]

There is a challenge in introducing metaethics - writing something that is both sufficiently detailed to provide knowledge to the readers, whilst not going so far as to loose them. I think Fisher balances this very well and has written a clear and fairly engaging introduction to the subject (well, engaging for what is not always a very interesting subject!). This book covers a good spectrum of metaethics in sufficient depth to understand many of the central arguments. It does not go as far or as deep as, for example, Miller's Introduction to Contemporary Metaethics, but then it is a significantly easier read.

Notes from second reading: I read this as a refresher, before I return to academic studies of ethics. It is a good primer, but as Fisher writes in the introduction this could almost be an introduction to an introduction. With metaethics one soon enters deep intellectual waters, that cut across other areas of philosophy especially epistemology and to some extent metaphysics. But this book is accessible even to the non-philosopher, if you read it careful and remember all the definitions. I find it useful and well written just to remind me of some aspects of metaethics.

I do wonder a little who it is written for. Too shallow for anyone seriously studying ethics, but on the other hand if you were not I'm not sure you would ever start studying metaethics. It's not an everyday subject!

[Mrekhy ET · Rating 5 out of 5]

كتاب أكتر من رائع، ومقدّمة أكتر من ممتازة. هو ميعتبرش تمهيد بمعنى الكلمة، ولكن زي ما قال المؤلف هو تمهيد للتمهيد.

أندرو فيشر هيفهّمك يعني هيفهّمك، مش هيسيبك غير ما يقدّملك مثال وإتنين وتلاتة علشان يتأكد أنك فهمت.

يا ريت كل كتب الفلسفة تكون بالوضوح وكل المؤلفين مهتمين بإن القاريء يفهم زي كده.


The perfect place to start Metaethics, but not the place to stop.

[David Top · Rating 5 out of 5]

A concise and clear introduction to the philosophical field of metaethics. This is a hard task and compromises are almost unavoidable but given this, Fisher is able to explain the major positions, considerations and distinctions.
With this being said, one might change the title to "a Brief introduction" because of the many instances of unexplained aspects of the theories.

But overall a good and well written introduction.

[Viktor · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lärde mig mycket från denna. Har tidigare varit mer intresserad av teoretisk filosofi och uppfattat hela etik-delen som rätt obaserad och cringe men har på senare tid upptäckt att det faktiskt inte är så illa och att det finns en hel del mumsfillibabba-insikter att hämta därifrån. Mycket genomsyras dock av anglosaxisk-hjärnskada med alldeles för stor tilltro till logik och sUnT föRnUFt (det värsta är när en mening inleds med "Surely..." *kräk-emoji*) men det problemet kan inte skyllas på författaren som här gör en bra sammanställning av de ledande teorierna (error-theory är based-pillrad och op, fack alla haters).

4/5

[Lucas · Rating 5 out of 5]

this book rocks

[Tijmen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Seems like a really accessible and good place to start exploring an interest in metaethics for a layman. The book contains a clearly structured overview of many of the important topics in metaethics and it sets you up with further reading tips if any of the discussions peak your interest.

5 stars for whoever is already interested in metaethics, but would not recommend to friends otherwise since it is even more of an abstract topic than I expected.

[Karl Wärn · Rating 5 out of 5]

Pretty damn near the ideal textbook. Fischer explains meta ethics, which is a rather murky subject, in a clear and easy to understand sort of way.

[Moderated · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Moral realism This is about what exists (ontology). The moral realist argues that moral properties exist and are in some way independent from people's judgements. For example, if moral realism is correct then we can say that the act of killing someone has the property of wrongness, and that it has it independently of whether people think it does.
Potential misunderstandings
• Moral realism is silent about the nature and origin of moral properties. So, for example, being a moral realist does not automatically mean that you are a theist. Moral properties can be natural or non-natural.
• Moral realists can hold that moral properties only exist becausepeople do. This is not the same as the claim that people can choose what is right and wrong.
• Just because the realists think that there are moral properties this does not mean they claim they know what things are right and wrong. It is perfectly consistent for the moral realist to claim that they have no better idea of what things are right and wrong than anyone else."

"Moral non-realism
The moral non-realist argues that there are no moral properties or facts. Non-realism includes, among others, quasi-realism, anti-realism, error theory and irrealism.
Potential misunderstandings
• Even though the non-realist thinks there are no moral properties and facts, this does not mean they think there is no moral truth. This would only follow if they also held that a claim is true if and only if there are facts and/or properties that make claims true. But this is an independent claim about the nature of truth that the non-realist could reject."

"Naturalism and non-naturalism
The naturalist claims that the only things that exist are those things that would appear in the scientific picture of what exists. The non-naturalist thinks that there are some things that exist that could not show up on the scientific picture of what exists. So, for example, pleasure, salt and electrons would be natural things whereas God would not be.
Potential misunderstandings
• You could be a non-naturalist and deny that God exists. All you are committed to as a non-naturalist is that there are some things that exist that would not show up in the scientific account of what exists.
• You can be a naturalist but not be a moral realist because all that the naturalist is committed to is the claim that if moral properties exist then they would be natural. This leaves it open that there may be no moral properties. Equally, you could be a non-naturalist but not be a moral realist, thinking perhaps that God exists but that he does not have anything to do with morality."

"The question at the heart of this chapter is whether we think that "good" also resists definition. Do we feel short-changed, for example, if we are told that "good" is just "pleasure"? In Principia Ethic a Moore argues that any proposed definition of "good" always leaves us feeling this way, and he takes this to be evidence that "good" is indefinable."

"The error theorist can think of morality as the glue needed in order for society to operate; glue that would lose its stickiness if the illusion of moral truth vanished. Error theory holds that moral practice is justified through its usefulness, not through its truthfulness."

"What is the link between God's commands and what is right and wrong? Is it the case that if God commands something then this causes it to be right or wrong, or that God's commanding is identical with something being right and wrong? Or does right and wrong supervene on God's commands?"

"In his dialogue Euthyphro, Plato has Euthyphro saying that "holiness is what all the gods love, and unholiness is what they hate': He then famously has Socrates charge Euthyphro with the question "Do the gods love holiness because it is holy, or is it holy because they love it?"

[Jeff Liu · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a really good introduction to metaethics. Fisher covers quite a lot of ground in this book. He writes about the major positions in metaethics, from emotivism to moral realism. He covers the arguments for and against each metaethical position in an unbiased manner.

At the end of each chapter, Fisher has a "things to remember list," which is really helpful for clarifying and correcting any potential misunderstandings of the chapter's topic.

I would really recommend this to any amateur philosopher or layman looking to get into ethics.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Felt like a good introduction to the subject. In general I liked the book’s brevity, but I feel like at times it was a weakness, forcing the author to attempt to explain extremely nuanced ideas in a short space. I frequently found myself struggling to understand the discussion and turning to external resources to clarify my understanding. Overall, I felt like the author gave a fair overview of the diverse viewpoints, but at times his biases bled through, primarily in his negative attitude towards error theory (which I admit to being partial to).

[P · Rating 5 out of 5]

Metaethics: An Introduction by Andrew Fisher is commendably well-written; it explains dauntingly complex philosophical jargon and ideas with straightforward definitions and examples.

Metaethics: An Introduction has taught me enough about metaethics and metaethical concepts to enable me to think in terms of metaethical language.

I have gotten precisely what I wanted from this book: a fundamental understanding of metaethics.

[Phine Hazelbag]

2023: 31/70* // no rating \\ Metaethics is a field full of philosphical -ism’s and can therefore be exhausting and incomprehensible. I read this book as guidance for my Metaethics course, and it definitely clarified many complex concepts for me in an accessible manner. Fisher structured the booklet in a clear way, so I do definitely recommend this to anyone that dips their feet in the field that considers what we are doing when we are engaging in moral practice.

[Isak Sandlund · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not much else to say than that this is an amazing book to start with if you want to learn about metaethics. Andrew Fisher manages to make a dense and at times very complicated subject both easy to digest and insightful which is by no means an easy feat. I would recommend this book to anyone with even a slight interest in ethics, it's simply a great book. Hats off!

[Błażej · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best philosophy introductory book I've read so far. Written lightly but comprehensively manages to sketch the main points and problems of major metaethical theories. Finds space for humor and narrative character in a piece that can (and maybe is) be used in an academic setting. Now that's some writing prowess.

[Jordan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great introduction to metaethics, it was really helpful to think about what different questions are faced in making ethical systems/statements. Some parts got confusing with terminology, so I had to refer back to definitions from the first chapter. I thought it was helpful to write down what I thought at each point, so I had a bit of a stake in the arguments-

[Nathan Ormond · Rating 5 out of 5]

A brilliant overview of contemporary meta ethics. Fisher makes complex concepts simple to understand with his informal writing style, breaking down dense philosophical texts into more manageable forms!

[Marie · Rating 4 out of 5]

This one is better than Miller's for newbies. I was not only able to finish it but also enjoy it along the way. I can’t claim I understood all of it—further study is definitely needed—but at least I now have an overview and know where to look next. Recommended.

[Atlrs · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good enough for an introduction to an introduction.

[Carlie Gavin · Rating 5 out of 5]

The perfect introductory text to metaethics. Easily digestible and Fisher has done justice in making this accessible to a layperson.

[Jakob Palmer · Rating 3 out of 5]

gute Einführung, aber teilweise doch nen bisschen sehr knapp, wäre nice gewesen ein zwei Debatten noch spezifischer nachvollziehen zu können

[Simon Fridh · Rating 5 out of 5]

Extremely well written I must say. Metaethics can be really hard and abstract, but here it is superbly introduced where each chapter is divided into short sections that explains the details in a (relatively) simple and accessible manner.

[Salman · Rating 4 out of 5]

The best intro book you can find on meta-ethics.

[Sean Richardson · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent introduction to a difficult topic.