Principia Ethica · Chapter
Principia Ethica explained
G.
What happens
G. E. Moore introduces his foundational work in ethics, arguing that 'good' is a simple, indefinable notion and identifying the naturalistic fallacy as the error of defining it in natural terms. He critiques hedonism and metaphysical ethics, distinguishes between ethics and conduct, and begins to identify intrinsic goods.
Free preview opens on this chapter — companions, themes, and character notes appear beside the text.
Narrative arc
Story tension across the book.
- Setup
- Breaking point
- Aftermath
- Closing
The emotional and psychological peak occurs when the text declares that we must finally understand what "good"…
Full beat labels and climax notes unlock in the reader.
Follow the arc while readingThemes in this chapter
- The Naturalistic Fallacy
Moore identifies and argues against the naturalistic fallacy, the error of defining 'good' in terms of natural properties.
- Critique of Hedonism
Moore critiques hedonistic theories, including those of Mill and Sidgwick, for committing the naturalistic fallacy.
Characters to notice
- G. E. Moore
Author and central philosopher presenting his ethical theory.
- J. S. Mill
Critiqued for his utilitarian hedonism and naturalistic fallacy.
- Henry Sidgwick
Critiqued for his version of hedonism.
- Immanuel Kant
Critiqued in the context of metaphysical ethics.
Key passages
“If I am asked 'What is good?' my answer is that good is good, and that is the end of the matter.”
When asked to define 'good,' Moore insists it is a simple, indefinable concept.
Moore's foundational claim that 'good' cannot be analyzed in terms of other properties.
“The naturalistic fallacy is the fallacy of identifying good with any natural object or property.”
The naturalistic fallacy is the mistake of equating 'good' with a natural quality.
Central to Moore's critique of naturalistic ethics.
