EMOTIVISM OF AYER:

Quest:  Discuss the Emotivism of A J Ayer   (June 2013, 250 words)

Ans.  The emotivism of A J Ayer is based on the logical positivism and its scientific background.  The principle of the “verifiability criterion of meaning” was propounded by logical positivists to assure  that whether any claim is cognitively meaningful  or not.  To be cognitively meaningful any statement has to be either analytic or empirically verifiable.

       In any analytic statement there is logical connection and meaning of terms.  For example, ‘Red rose is red’, is true because of the understanding of terms and logical connections, not because of being empirically verifiable.  There must be some probability of observation for any empirically verifiable statement.  But statement like ‘God exists’ is neither analytic nor empirically verifiable. That’s why it can be neither declared true nor false.  It doesn’t have any cognitive meaning but only emotive meaning.   So, according to logical positivist it is merely a pseudo-concept. 

       According to Ayer, Moral judgments are not cognitively meaningful because they are neither analytic nor empirically verifiable.  He asserts that moral judgments are not analytic because of their definitions being naturalistic. 

Also they conflict with how we use language.  According to him the fallacy lies in defining emotive term by using non-emotive terms.  For example “good” = approved by the society.  But to say that some things approved by the society is not good is not contradictory.  So, moral judgements have not any cognitive meaning. They have only emotive meaning.  Being devoid of cognitive meaning there are no moral truths.

       Also, moral judgements are not empirically verifiable because of ‘good’ not being definable in empirical terms.  Moral judgements are not analytic either because of not being true by definition.

       Being neither analytical nor empirical, moral judgements are neither true nor false.  They are merely emotive expressions. 

       The only difference between simple subjectivism and emotivism is that it doesn’t assert that all moral judgements are true.

       Critics raise several objections against emotivism. They say that the positivist’s assertion that every statement must be either analytical or empirically verifiable is itself neither analytical nor empirically verifiable . It is itself contradictory.

       Another objection raised by critics of positivism is that all moral statements cannot be translated into emotive statements.  Further, emotivism cannot differentiate between moral judgements and moral imperatives.  At the same time moral judgements are not emotional but rotational decisions.  We judge everything rationally.

       Thus, the above analysis shows that instead of solving the problems created by simple subjectivists, emotivism falls prey to the same problems. Nobody can decide, on account of emotivism, that which statement is more correct than another.  Further, if any judgement is neither true nor false then it is useless to give decisions.

Logical Positivism:  The basis of Emotivism of A J Ayer is, Logical Positivism. Logical Positivists tried to apply scientific method in the realm of philosophy.   They gave the principle of the ‘verifiability criterion of meaning’ to test the claim. Any claim is cognitively meaningful if, either it is analytic or it is empirically verifiable.

       Logical connection and meaning of terms is the basis of analytic statements.  They cannot be empirically verified. For any empirically verifiable statement to become true, it is necessary that some possible observations make it probable.