PRESCRIPTIVISM, Shibin Antony

Prescriptivism

Prescriptivism is a theory about moral statements. It claims that such statements contain an element of meaning which serves to prescribe or direct actions. The history of prescriptivism includes Socrates, Aristotle, Hume, Kant and Mill and it has been influential also in recent times.

Moral statements also contain a factual or descriptive element. The descriptive element of morality differs between persons and cultures, but the prescriptive element remains constant. Prescriptivism can allow for moral disagreement and explain moral disagreement and explain moral weakness. It can also explain better than other theories the rationality and objectivity of moral thinking. Prescriptivism is also understood as a theory about the meaning of moral terms such as good, right and ought. Its principal advocate has been R.M Hare .The theory draws a contrast between descriptive meanings, whereby language is used for stating facts and prescriptive which is the characteristic of moral language. Moral terms are used primarily for guiding action for telling people what to do. As such they are similar to imperatives, which also have prescriptive meaning. Moral discourse is not as the emotive theory of ethics had seemed to suggest a manipulative process of playing on people's feelings. It is a rational activity, addressed to others as rational agents. It is however, logically distinct from the activity of descriptive discourse and hence no statements of fact can entail any conclusion about what one ought to do.

Prescriptivism sees moral judgments as a type of prescription, or imperative. Moral judgments, like the simple imperative "Close the door," don't state facts and aren't true or false. Instead, they express our will, or our desires.

Ought judgments are universalizable prescriptions. "You ought to do this" is equivalent to "Do this and let everyone do the same in similar cases." So moral beliefs express our desire that a kind of act be done in the present case and in all similar cases -- including ones where we imagine ourselves in someone else's place.

Prescriptivism shows how we can be both free and rational in forming our moral beliefs. Moral beliefs can be free because they express our desires and aren't provable from facts. They can be rational because the logic of "ought" leads to a method of moral reasoning that engages our rational powers to their limits.

Prescriptivism, while it has important insights, seems to rest on a questionable foundation. It says that ought judgments are universalizable prescriptions (or imperatives), and not truth claims. This leads it to deny the possibility of moral knowledge and moral truths -- which seems to conflict with how we approach ethics in our daily lives.

 

--