기술주의 윤리설에 대한 헤어의 비판

This Study aim to examine R. M. Hare's Criticism of Ethical Descriptivism. Hare made the main division of ethical theories into two genera, which he called descriptivist and non-descriptivist theories. He said that the differentia between these was that descriptivist theories affirm, but that non-descriptivist theories deny, that, apart from syntactical features, the meanings of moral statements are determined entirely by their truth conditions. According to his texonomy of ethical theories, descriptive theories divided into naturalist and intuitionist theories, and non-descriptive theories divided into emotivist and prescriptivist theories. Hare criticizes descriptive theories by the term the ‘descriptive fallacy'. And, then, through the criticism of emotivist theories, he seek to establish a rationalistic non-descriptivism. Hare has developed a theory of moral reasoning which he calls ‘universal prescriptivism’. Moral reasoning is reasoning used to arrive at moral judgements. A moral judgement is a kind of value judgement. To understand moral reasoning, one must first understand the logical structure of value judgements. Moral judgements, according to Hare, have two kinds of meaning, prescriptive and descriptive. As prescriptive, moral judgements give directions for action. As descriptive, moral judgements are universalizable.