Editing Metaethics (section)

==Metaethical questions==
According to Richard Garner and Bernard Rosen, there are three kinds of metaethical problems, or three general questions:<ref name="Garner and Rosen">{{cite book|last=Garner|first=Richard T.|title=Moral Philosophy: A Systematic Introduction to Normative Ethics and Meta-ethics|author2=Bernard Rosen|publisher=[[Macmillan Publishers|Macmillan]]|year=1967|location=New York|pages=215|lccn=67-18887}}</ref>
#What is the meaning of moral terms or judgments? (moral [[semantics]])
#*Asks about the meanings of such words as 'good', 'bad', 'right', and 'wrong' (see [[value theory]])
#What is the nature of moral judgments? (moral [[ontology]])
#*Asks questions of whether moral judgments are [[moral absolutism|absolute]] or [[moral relativism|relative]], of one kind or [[Value pluralism|many kinds]], etc.
#How may moral judgments be supported or defended? (moral [[epistemology]])
#*Asks such questions as how we can know if something is right or wrong, if at all.
Garner and Rosen say that answers to the three basic questions "are not unrelated, and sometimes an answer to one will strongly suggest, or perhaps even entail, an answer to another."<ref name="Garner and Rosen" /> A metaethical theory, unlike a [[normative ethics|normative ethical]] theory, does not attempt to evaluate specific choices as being better, worse, good, bad, or evil; although it may have profound implications as to the validity and meaning of normative ethical claims. An answer to any of the three example questions above would not itself be a normative ethical statement.