A classmate in another course approaches you at lunch and asks to talk to you about a personal matter. You agree and she then tells you, "I'm considering an abortion, but I'm confused. I asked a couple of my friends and one said 'Abortion is wrong' and the other said 'Abortion is right.' Also, I'm not even sure there is such a thing as 'right' and 'wrong.' Is abortion right or is it wrong?"

The answers to her question is coming from a non-cognitivist point of view.

This is not a debate about abortion itself. It is a debate about how you would apply your ethical philosophy(Non-Cognitivism) to a practical issue like abortion.

You might even want to pretend that you are responding to someone who is giving this student bad advice from your perspective.

The underlying assumption of a non-cognitivist is that moral knowledge is impossible. Decisions are based on how the individual feels about the situation. Therefore these are the thoughts and ideas I would share with my friend.

Moral knowledge is something that some people claim to be able to impart to others. But in fact it is impossible to acquire moral knowledge. What people are telling you is their personal feeling or perspective regarding your situation. Some people cannot fathom aborting a fetus because they think this is the same as murder. Other people think that abortion is the moral choice for you. In fact, you really shouldn't believe that either one of these choices is moral or immoral. What you need to concentrate on is how you feel about this decision.