One of Rachel's biggest claims against emotivism is that it seems to lack reasons. What are moral reasons? How do they differ from other kinds of evidence, such as physical facts? Why would it be important to have reasons in a moral argument, and how does the lack of moral reasons hurt emotivism?
Hello and thank you for using Brainmass. The solution below should get you started. Since you did not attach an article explaining the situation or the story about Rachel, the solution below does not refer to the story. It is general though and should get you started. If you need room for further research, you can use the listed references. A word version of the solution is attached for easy download and printing. Good luck with your studies.
OTA 105878/Xenia Jones
About Moral Reasoning
Moral reasoning is a person or a group's practical rationalization and decision about the actions one must take and do from a moral viewpoint. It is important to remember that morality and moral values are products of socialization and a shared culture/cultural experience. So the individual or the collective acting on a situation, a challenge or reacting to what is going on around them do so based on learned and adopted principles of one's own and that of the group and the community the individual belongs to. Take for instance an individual who is a member of a devout Christian family and community. This individual's moral reasoning therefore will be based on Christian values as well as the values and principles he learned from his parents and from his community and socialization. Consider the idea of abortion. Using a Christian viewpoint, the moral principle of the individual would be against ...
The solution is an 816-word narrative that tackles the topic of emotivism vs. moral reasoning and evidence. Moral reasoning is defined and discussed and the lack of moral reasons as well as evidence i in an emotivist argument is tackled. references are listed for further research. A word version is attached for easy printing.