Emotivism teaches that moral statements do nothing but express the speaker`s feelings on this subject. Stevenson`s work was seen both as the elaboration of Ayer`s point of view and as a representation of one of the “two broad types of ethical emotivism.”   As an analytical philosopher, in his 1937 essay “The Emotive Meaning of Ethical Terms,” Stevenson suggested that each ethical theory should explain three things: that intelligent differences of opinion can occur on moral issues, that moral notions such as “magnetic” good to promote trade, and that the scientific method is not sufficient to verify moral pretensions.  Stevenson`s theory was fully developed in 1944 in his book Ethics and Language. In this paper, he agrees with Ayer that ethical phrases express the speaker`s feelings, but adds that they also have an imperative component that aims to change the listener`s feelings and that this component is more important.  When Ayer spoke of fundamental psychological values or tendencies, Stevenson spoke of attitudes, and where Ayer spoke of disagreement over facts or rational quarrels over the application of certain values to a particular case, Stevenson speaks of differences of faith; the concepts are the same.  Apart from terminology, Stevenson interprets ethical statements in two models of analysis. This is why this theory is called emotivism, because it is based on the emotional effect of moral language. Philosophers who have assumed that real action is necessary so “good” must be used in a sincere assessment, have been put in trouble because of the weakness of the will, and they should certainly agree that sufficient has been done if we can show that every human being has reasons to aim for virtue and avoid vices. But is it impossible if we consider things that are considered a virtue and a vice? For example, think of cardinal virtues, prudence, moderation, courage and justice. Of course, every human being needs caution, but shouldn`t he also resist the temptation of pleasure when there is damage? And how can we say that he would never have to face what was feared for good? It is not obvious what it would mean to say that moderation or courage are not good qualities, not because of the “praise” meaning of those words, but because of things that are courage and moderation.  (Dr.