I think consequentalism is a form of ethics, where emotivism is a system of meta-ethics, so they aren't mutually exclusive. A form of conseuentalism may value emotional states to be maximised (say, in Hedonism) which might be determined in relation to our emotional evaluations. The ethical moment to which an emotivist would react to might be in the consequence of the action or in reaction to the maxim governing action.
Ayer's belief that morals are subjective, lacking a truth value, means that the meta-ethical system of emotivism can be alligned with any ethical system.
Three main subdivisions of consequentialism are Ethical Egoism- morally right only if the consequences of an action is favorable only to the one performing an action. Utilitarianism- morally right if the consequences of an action is favorable to everyone. Ethical Altruism- morally right if the consequences of an action is favorable to everyone except to the one performing an action.
Utilitarianism is a specific form of consequentialism that focuses on maximizing overall happiness or well-being, while consequentialism is a broader ethical theory that judges actions based on their outcomes or consequences.
Utilitarianism and consequentialism are related ethical theories, but they are not synonymous. Utilitarianism specifically focuses on maximizing overall happiness or well-being, while consequentialism more broadly considers the consequences of actions without necessarily prioritizing happiness.
consequentialism
approves of the act.
Emotivism is also known as noncognitivism.
Vetoes are overridden by 2/3 vote from The House and Senate.
Methods which are declared final cannot be overridden.
Emotivism is a metaethical theory that states moral judgments are expressions of emotions or attitudes, rather than objective truths. In other words, when someone makes a moral statement, they are not expressing a fact about the world, but rather their own feelings or beliefs about a particular issue.
John Tyler was the first to have a veto overridden.
Consequentialism is an attractive ethical approach because it provides clear and practical guidance – at least in situations where outcomes are easy to predict. The theory is also impartial.
Precedence of operators in an expression overridden by the use of parentheses