Book Reading Summary Flashcards
Baby Theresa
arguments for transplant
- organs aren’t doing her any good so will be better suited in other babies
- it is no use being a live if you cannot live your life
we should not use others as means
- Theresa doesn’t have any autonomy, so we cannot thwart it
- she has no interests or input, so we get no guidance from her
wrongness of killing
- there are exceptions to killing, is Theresa one??
- death is brain dead, not heart stop, so isn’t she technically dead
- therefore, this argument wouldn’t apply
Jody and Mary
the argument that we should save as many as we can
- we should save one, instead of them both dying
argument from the sanity of human life
- killing shouldn’t be done, even if it serves a good purpose
- the surgery didn’t kill her, she was too weak to survive on her own
- killing might be justified if a person is going to die no matter what, doesn’t want to live anymore, or will save others who will go on to live fulfilling lives
Tracy Latimer
the argument of the wrongness of discriminating against the handicapped
- handicapped people should be given the same rights and respects as everyone else
- she wasn’t killed because she was disabled, she was killed because she was suffering
the slippery slope argument
- if we think this way, life will be held cheaply, and we’ll end up like natzis if we take the first step
- it’s difficult to determine the future and what will be the results of actions now
what is the minimum conception of morality
Morality is the effort to guide one’s conduct by reason—that is, to do what there are the best reasons for doing—while giving equal weight to the interests of each individual affected by one’s decision.
do all ethical theories adopt the minimum conception of morality?
no, but those who don’t face a lot of difficulty
The Utilitarian Approach to Euthanasia
- euthanasia is morally right, as we are respecting the free will of the person, and their actions do not harm anyone else, so it should be legal
The Utilitarian Approach to Marijuana
- the are more advantages to disadvantages of recreations pot use right now, but as research changes, the view will change as well
- people are happier and essentially less of a problem to society that alcoholics and cigarette smokers
The Utilitarian Approach to Non Human Animals
- non human animals should be treated the same as humans, so experiments should be done, only if there are more advantages to disadvantages, and more people end up happy
- by this logic, we should all become vegetarians or start actually taking care of the animals before we kill them
Classic Utilitarian Approach
- pleasure is all that matters
- ignores the value we place on artistic creativity and friendship
- individual rights aren’t a thing, as it is all about what brings the group the most happiness and pleasure
- isn’t concerned with our obligations, as the past doesn’t matter
- by adopting this way of thinking, no one becomes special, and our lives become meaningless, as we could always be doing something to better the lives of others
what are the three arguments that say if utilitarianism looks at things other than the outcome, than it’s incorrect?
justice
- by lying and convicting an innocent person, more happiness is achieved
rights
- if you get naked pictures taken of you, if brings more happiness to those who took the pictures, than the displeasure from the subject, even though it violated rights
backward looking reasons
- if we promise our friend something, but another activity brings us joy instead, we should bail, but we made a promise, and this approach doesn’t account for the past
defense of the utilitarian approach
contesting the consequences
- we shouldn’t be thinking of only theoretical, as they wouldn’t work that way in the real world, but this approach should stand true for all situations
the principle of utility is a guide for choosing rules not acts
- if we make it so that situations have to comply to a set of rules that are morally correct, but then what if a different outcome produces more happiness, then we are back to the beginning with no rules and only acts.
common sense is wrong
- why does it need to comply, basically fuck it
why is the common sense is wrong argument supported by utilitarianism
- if lying and breaking trust eventually reduce are happiness, than maintaining this must bring us happiness, and therefore is moral in the eyes of utilitarianism
- shouldn’t trust out gut, as out gut tells us that all lies are wrong and lead to unhappiness, but what if they actually lead to more happiness
- all of the consequences should be focused on, as by arresting an innocent man, hundreds of other lives have been saved
concluding thought of utilitarian
- by not trusting common sense, utilitarianism might be far superior, as we once thought of blacks and whites as unequal, but now that seems crazy
- people might look back and wonder why we are keeping animals in pens and not helping the disadvantaged people of this world.
what is the state of nature and what do humans need in society
- where we are free to do as we please
- equality of need
- scarcity
- the essential equality of human power(we are better when we work together)
- limited altruism
what is the definition of a social contract
the rules people agree on to govern their interactions
what are issues around civil disobedience in last part of the chapter.
when the disadvantaged are denied the benefits of social living, they are released from the contract that would require them to follow societies rules
- think of King and Ghandi and MLK
