Organisation of Material
OK, I think that you have enough insights now to write another section of your book. You started out with a very skeptical conclusion about the ability to know what descriptive states of affairs over which ethics supervened. But now you are making a much bolder claim, about the ways in which evaluative statements may supervene over descriptive statements.
The best thing to do is first to distinguish three different levels of description and prescription for terms. A level 1 term is a necessarily prescriptive term--such as "good" or "ought"--in that it must always presuppose a value judgement. A level 2 term can be either prescriptive or descriptive depending on the way in which it is used. For example, a word like "approve" is prescriptive when it is used in the first person, as in, "I approve of your helping that old lady cross the street." But when it is used in the second or third person, it becomes merely descriptive, as in "Hitler approved of killing the Jews," or "Do you approve of your daughter being out this late?" Hence, we can say that a level 2 term is a contingently prescriptive or contingently descriptive term. Finally, a level 3 term is a necessarily descriptive term, whereby no value judgement is ever presupposed by using it, such as the vast majority of words, like "do," "be", "can", etc.
We should also note that there are similar levels of description and prescription for claims. Level 1 is pure prescription, as in the claim "That is good", which one might first make when evaluating a state of affairs in the world. Level 2 is bracketed prescription, by which I mean that it is a prescriptive claim bracketed in descriptive terms, as in the claim "I think that that is good". One might make a level 2 claim when challenged by someone else into a moral argument. Level 3 is bare description, as in the claim "I value that" when really pressed against the wall in the face of a blistering attack on one's ethical position.
Note that there is a converse of a prescriptive claim bracketed in descriptive terms, namely a descriptive claim bracketed in prescriptive terms. Such a claim could be "I ought to value that". Note, however, that this kind of claim is really a pure prescription, so the only viable level 2 claim is a prescriptive claim bracketed in descriptive terms, rather than a descriptive claim bracketed in prescriptive terms.
The best thing to do is first to distinguish three different levels of description and prescription for terms. A level 1 term is a necessarily prescriptive term--such as "good" or "ought"--in that it must always presuppose a value judgement. A level 2 term can be either prescriptive or descriptive depending on the way in which it is used. For example, a word like "approve" is prescriptive when it is used in the first person, as in, "I approve of your helping that old lady cross the street." But when it is used in the second or third person, it becomes merely descriptive, as in "Hitler approved of killing the Jews," or "Do you approve of your daughter being out this late?" Hence, we can say that a level 2 term is a contingently prescriptive or contingently descriptive term. Finally, a level 3 term is a necessarily descriptive term, whereby no value judgement is ever presupposed by using it, such as the vast majority of words, like "do," "be", "can", etc.
We should also note that there are similar levels of description and prescription for claims. Level 1 is pure prescription, as in the claim "That is good", which one might first make when evaluating a state of affairs in the world. Level 2 is bracketed prescription, by which I mean that it is a prescriptive claim bracketed in descriptive terms, as in the claim "I think that that is good". One might make a level 2 claim when challenged by someone else into a moral argument. Level 3 is bare description, as in the claim "I value that" when really pressed against the wall in the face of a blistering attack on one's ethical position.
Note that there is a converse of a prescriptive claim bracketed in descriptive terms, namely a descriptive claim bracketed in prescriptive terms. Such a claim could be "I ought to value that". Note, however, that this kind of claim is really a pure prescription, so the only viable level 2 claim is a prescriptive claim bracketed in descriptive terms, rather than a descriptive claim bracketed in prescriptive terms.
Comments