Error Theory

1) What is Error Theory?

The Error theory is a philosophical view that denies the existence of objective moral values and holds that moral statements are always false. According to this view, when people make moral claims, they are expressing attitudes or preferences, rather than describing facts about the world.

Error theory is a form of moral skepticism that challenges the idea that there are objective moral truths that can be discovered through reason or intuition. It argues that moral statements are not grounded in any objective facts or properties of the world, but rather are mere expressions of personal preferences or attitudes.

Proponents of error theory often argue that moral discourse is fundamentally flawed because it assumes the existence of objective moral truths that are not supported by any evidence. They contend that moral statements cannot be true or false in the same way that factual statements can, since they are not grounded in any objective facts or properties of the world.

One of the key implications of error theory is that it undermines the possibility of moral justification. If there are no objective moral values, then there can be no moral grounds for justifying one’s actions or beliefs.

2) J.L. Mackie and error theory:

J.L. Mackie was an influential philosopher in the field of metaethics, best known for his development of error theory. Mackie’s work challenged traditional assumptions about the nature of moral values, arguing that they do not exist in the same way that objective facts do. Instead, he contended that moral statements are expressions of subjective attitudes or preferences.

Mackie’s error theory was first introduced in his book “Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong,” published in 1977. In this work, he argued that moral properties do not exist in the same way that physical properties do. He contended that moral facts, such as the fact that it is wrong to harm others, cannot be reduced to any objective features of the world. Rather, they are simply expressions of subjective attitudes or preferences.

One of Mackie’s key arguments was that the existence of moral values would require a kind of “queerness” that is not found in the natural world. He believed that if moral values were objective and universal, they would have to exist in a supernatural or metaphysical realm. Mackie thought that such a realm was unlikely to exist, and thus moral values could not be objective in the way that traditional ethical theories assumed.

Mackie’s error theory is a form of moral skepticism that challenges the idea that there are objective moral truths that can be discovered through reason or intuition. He argued that moral statements are not grounded in any objective facts or properties of the world, but rather are mere expressions of personal preferences or attitudes. This leads to the conclusion that all moral claims are false, since they presuppose the existence of objective moral values that do not actually exist.

Mackie’s error theory has been influential in the field of metaethics, and has spurred a great deal of debate and discussion. While some philosophers have embraced error theory, others have criticized it for being too radical and implausible. One common criticism of error theory is that it fails to account for the persuasive force of moral arguments, which seem to be able to motivate people to act in certain ways, even if there are no objective moral values.

Despite its critics, error theory remains an important and influential position in contemporary moral philosophy. It challenges traditional assumptions about the nature of moral values, and has forced philosophers to think more deeply about the foundations of ethical thought. Mackie’s work has also helped to highlight the importance of language and semantics in ethical discourse, and has raised important questions about the relationship between language and reality.

3) Eliminativism:

Eliminativism is a philosophical view that challenges the existence of certain kinds of entities, ideas, or concepts. In the context of metaethics, eliminativism is often associated with error theory, which denies the existence of objective moral values. Eliminativists in this context argue that moral concepts and language are so deeply flawed that they should be eliminated altogether.

The key argument of eliminativism is that certain kinds of entities, ideas, or concepts are not real, and that we should stop using them in our discourse. In the case of metaethics, eliminativists argue that moral values and concepts are not grounded in any objective facts or properties of the world, and are therefore not real. This position is similar to error theory, which holds that moral statements are always false because they presuppose the existence of objective moral values that do not actually exist.

One of the main arguments used by eliminativists is that moral language is inherently ambiguous and unclear. They point out that moral concepts are used in a variety of different ways, and that it is often unclear what exactly people mean when they make moral claims. This ambiguity and lack of clarity, according to eliminativists, makes it impossible to have any meaningful or objective discussions about moral values.

Eliminativists also argue that moral concepts are not needed in order to have a functioning society. They point out that people can still cooperate and live together without appealing to any objective moral values. In fact, they argue, relying on moral concepts may even be harmful, since it can lead to dogmatism, intolerance, and conflict.

Critics of eliminativism argue that it is too radical and implausible. They contend that moral concepts are an essential part of human communication and social interaction, and that eliminating them would be impractical and harmful. They also point out that even if objective moral values do not exist, moral language can still be useful in expressing attitudes, emotions, and preferences.

4) Its criticisms:

Despite its appeal to some philosophers, there are several criticisms of the error theory. One common criticism is that it leads to moral skepticism, which is the view that we cannot know anything about moral truths or values. This means that error theory undermines our ability to make any moral judgments, and can lead to a sense of moral nihilism. Critics argue that this is an untenable position because it undermines our ability to make ethical decisions and act morally in the world.

Another criticism of error theory is that it cannot explain the widespread and persistent belief in objective moral values. People across different cultures and historical periods have expressed a strong belief in moral values and principles, which seems difficult to explain if these values do not exist. Critics argue that error theory fails to account for the strong intuitive pull of moral truths and values, and therefore cannot fully capture the complexity of ethical discourse and practice.

Finally, some critics argue that error theory is self-defeating because it implies that the error theorist’s own position is also false. If all moral statements are false, then the error theory itself must be false, which undermines its own credibility as a theory.

5) Its Implications in Science:

Error theory, as a philosophical theory that denies the existence of objective moral values, has several implications in science. One of the key implications is that it challenges the idea that science can provide objective answers to moral questions.

Science has traditionally been seen as a reliable method for discovering objective facts about the natural world. However, if moral values do not exist objectively, then it seems that science cannot provide objective answers to moral questions. This means that there is no scientific method for determining what is morally right or wrong.

Moreover, the error theory challenges the idea that science can provide a foundation for moral progress. Many people believe that scientific progress can help us to improve our moral understanding and behavior. However, if there are no objective moral values, then it seems that scientific progress cannot lead to moral progress. This means that scientific discoveries and advancements cannot provide a basis for moral improvement or change.

Finally, the error theory also challenges the way in which science is often used to support or justify moral claims. Many people use scientific findings to support their moral beliefs, such as the claim that it is wrong to harm animals because they can feel pain. However, if there are no objective moral values, then it seems that scientific findings cannot be used to support moral claims in this way. This means that the relationship between science and morality is much more complex than is often assumed.

6) Legacy:

The error theory, which denies the existence of objective moral values and claims that all moral statements are false, has had a significant impact on metaethics and moral philosophy. Its legacy can be seen in several ways.

Firstly, the error theory has sparked important debates and discussions about the nature of moral truth and value. It has challenged traditional assumptions about the existence of objective moral values and has led to a re-examination of the relationship between language and reality in ethical discourse.

Moreover, error theory has stimulated the development of alternative approaches to moral philosophy. Many philosophers have sought to develop alternative theories that can account for the complexities of moral discourse and practice without relying on the existence of objective moral values. These alternative theories include expressivism, relativism, and constructivism.

Furthermore, the error theory has highlighted the importance of epistemological and metaphysical questions in ethical inquiry. It has raised important questions about the relationship between moral concepts, language, and reality, and has challenged philosophers to think more deeply about the nature of moral knowledge and justification.

Finally, the error theory has influenced contemporary discussions about the role of moral philosophy in society. Some philosophers have argued that the error theory highlights the limitations of traditional moral philosophy and the need for a more interdisciplinary approach that takes into account insights from other fields such as psychology, sociology, and anthropology.