Both part of same university, but there was a movement in ethics called
intuitionism. Prichard and moore. Ethics would define its terms. You would expect
this, but it is a view that the term good, is not defineable in the sense that breaking it
up into componable parts. Philosophical or analytical defenition. The idea is you
take a word that is complex and you analyze it to break it down to its definition.
Analysis-comes from greek word for loosening up. Breaking down concept. He says
good is a simple concept and cannot be analyzed. Good is probly the central term of
ethics so its useful that we say good is simple and not analyzable. You’ll still find a
definition for good in the dictionary. But it is not technically an analysis of the word.
For example, yellow, yellow is simple. You cant really break it down much.
He is about to make a criticism of philosophies that do attempt to make a
definition for good. Utilitarianism makes the mistake that good can be equitable to
other things. The other problem is taking a concept that is ethical or moral and
equating it with something that is natural. This is called the naturalistic fallacy-
falacy is equati