Second Argument for Non-Cognitivism

Argument

Premises

1. Accepting a moral claim involves the giving/accepting of a Command
2. One can assert the existence of something without offering Commands

Conclusion

Cognitivism allows for making moral claims without commands. This is Absurd

Counterargument

Rejecting Premise 1

Deny that there is a connection between believing claims and accepting commands. One can think an act wrong, but not issue the imperative to back it up.

• “Murder is wrong, but I dont care! Kill frank!“. It knows an act is wrong, but issues a command that is not directly following the moral action

Rejecting Premise 2

Argue that whenever you believe a moral claim, you are also believing the derivative imperative claims aswell.

• I believe that murder is wrong, thus I believe the command “Don’t kill” is also a valid command See Argument from Synonymy