Ethics and Values Flashcards
For Singer, what is the difference between consequentialist and non-consequentialist thought?
Non-consequentialists honour rather than promote values, yet for him ideas of liberty and respect should be promoted
Who saw utilitarianism as non-calculating system?
John Austin in The Providence of Jurisprudence Determined, which saw law held by those with power as more important - consequentialism justifies action rather than creates moralistic computers
What does Singer support in terms of fixing moralistic computers?
Use of restrictive consequentialism, where the consequences are seen as more important than taking the time to calculate them - promote best ideas instead
What is the problem with honouring actions rather than promoting them for Singer?
There is no reason to honour one value over another - consequentialism is more rational therefore
What problem does Mill have with pleasure and happiness?
Mill equates them, but what about the depressed man drinking - gains pleasure but no real happiness
How does Benn fix Mill?
Goodness legitimises pleasure, so that sadism is not taken into account in terms of consequences
How does Benn value not acting?
Act omission can be as bad as causing a bad consequence itself, but for him it is supererogatory - malice is worse than sloth, even if this only explains rather than justifies actions
How does Benn see the problem of bad motives?
It is important not to desire bad effects, a bad outcome is acceptable if the guiding intention was a good one - Just War Theory criticised therefore
How does Benn evaluate Rawls’ separateness of persons?
Avoid impartial benevolent spectator creating a unitary perspective rather than an individual’s interest - as a result, injustice is the biggest problem for consequentialism
What is the problem with the unitary perspective?
Total utility is more important than average utility, never any idea of threshold reaching
Why is the experience machine not a good idea?
Motivations for pleasurable things count as well - being in machine does not give that deeper reasoning
How does Nozick view rights?
Rights should be side constraints otherwise it would be impossible to act it using someone as a means, without having to check every time that they weren’t
What are innocent threats?
Individuals who have become threatening to you due to the actions of others but are in fact innocent themselves - raises problems for ethics
Which problem does Nozick raise which would be difficult to find a solution to, yet likely would not exist?
Utility monster, who kills all others to maximise their utility - akin to climate change?
Why does Nozick disagree with the experience machine in terms of pleasure?
We take pleasure from the want to do certain things and doing them, rather than the experience
Why does Nozick disagree with the experience machine in terms of the individual?
No ability to develop personally in the machine, no personality trait found so who we really are is seen as unimportant - lack of respect to person
Why does Nozick disagree with the experience machine in terms of the experience provided?
No actual contact with deeper reality such as psychedelic drugs or nirvana
What is an example of Bentham’s rejection of religion in morality?
Mercy killings, showing there is no utilitarianism to God
What is happiness for Rachels?
Not the good, but a response to things we think are the good
Why does Rachels see utilitarianism as against justice?
It tramples on rights and ignores backward-looking reasons, confining our attention to what will happen, and ignoring personal relationships
What does utilitarian thought do with supererogatory actions?
Eliminates the distinction between moral and supererogatory for Rachels
Why does JJC Smart disagree with deontology?
The common sense standpoints of deontology are actually based on prejudice, and are fixed even if society changes, therefore irrational
What is the narrative arc objection?
Often overall utility is not as important as the order in which events come in in seeing how good they are - yet when goodness is happiness, this appears circular
How does Mill differentiate higher and lower pleasures?
If all those who had experienced both preferred one to the other, then that is the higher pleasure - also in terms of long term development of person
How does act utilitarianism overcome rule utilitarianism?
Constant fine-graining of rules in order to satisfy all cases leads to collapse of requirement of rules - also, for utilitarians it should be clear already what is bad without rules
What is the downfall of negative utilitarianism?
If saving people from pain is vital, then killing painlessly those who are suffering is a moral imperative
Why is preference utilitarianism preferred by some?
It is easier to please someone’s preferences than find out what really makes them happy, and is therefore less paternalistic
What are motive consequentialists?
Best acts are motivates by wanting best results (Parfit)
How does Parfit use maxims in consequentialism?
Use of optimistic maxims, that if everyone acted on these things would go impartially best
What is the Kantian Law of Nature Formula for Parfit?
Individuals would rationally will it to be true that everyone followed these maxims, leads to the Kantian argument for Rule Consequentialism
Why are optimific principles good for Parfit?
They toe the line between egoism and impartiality, as there are sufficient reasons to support both often. Also can allow us to support actions that would not make things go best - instead, holding up partial ideas like love
Why does Parfit see fault in impartiality?
If everyone had the power to choose which principles everyone had to accept, they would be impartial yet still allow deontic rules such as permitting love
What does Parfit use overall in his theory?
Kant’s Formula of Universal Law with Rule Consequentialism implied within
Why is preference utilitarianism objected to?
Inter-personal case of two individuals with two strong preferences - which one to support? Also bad preferences exist, how should be regard/evaluate these?
What is the practical impossibility objection?
It is impossible to foresee all consequences of an action, and therefore it is hard to know what is moral and what maximises utility - yet normally it is not so hard to know what is moral - reducto ad absurdum
What is Mill’s opinion of the hedonic calculus?
Use of rules of conventional morality instead as these will lead to greatest utility, rather than spending time calculating things
How does the utilitarian overcome the sadist objection?
Either through accepting the end results of it, or using higher and lower pleasures, where sadist pleasures are seen valueless
What is the demandingness objection to utilitarianism?
Giving all to charity to maximise utility is a moral imperative for utilitarians as no idea of degrees
What reasons does Williams give to support utilitarianism?
No link between religion and morality, happiness is a simple idea, calculation of what is moral is a clear system, and no problem of two bad decisions that deontology faces
What is the problem of what counts as utility for Williams?
If too generous, then difficult to argue that it is clear to calculate the good
What is Williams’ problem with both act and rule utilitarianism?
We do not know what it would be like if everyone followed utilitarianism so the imagined consequences do not hold water
What is Williams’ final belief on utilitarianism?
To reach utilitarian aims, people should not believe in utilitarianism such as in sadist case
How does Singer view promises in utilitarianism?
There is no rational basis for promises under utilitarianism as since those upholding the promise know that those under it are expecting it to be broken when utility allows, no point for promise in first place
How does Singer expect communication to occur in utilitarianism?
Since everyone knows truth is dependent on utility, why would you trust and therefore communicate with anyone? There is no utility benefit for telling the truth often
How does Singer fix the problem of communication?
Once people realise that utility is increased through communication, it occurs, but not before shutdown of normal communication - truth-telling sets up good practice that helps all, same with not lying
What is the difference between Mill and Sidgwick on utilitarianism?
Mill - support actions that are reasonably expected to maximise happiness
Sidgwick - support actions that tend to promote greatest happiness
What does rule utilitarianism fix?
Enforced impartiality, moral status of actions (importance of consequences compared to motives) and justice
What problem does Scheffler-Landau raise about justice in utilitarianism?
The well-connected criminal may be able to force the jury to get him off, which maximises utility at the price of justice
What did RM Hare believe in?
Keep slavery if it maximises utility
What does Hooker believe on rule utilitarianism?
Rules should be decided around both happiness and fairness
What does Singer believe in terms of salary?
You only legally, rather than morally have ownership of your paycheck - spread it widely instead
What has Harris written on utilitarianism?
Survival Lottery where an individual is killed to harvest organs - morally required, and arguments against are just moral convictions
What does Scheffler-Landau say about those who support utilitarianism or not?
Importance of common sense belief on moral convictions leads to support or reject of utilitarianism
What does JJC Smart believe about rules in utilitarianism?
Rules do not matter for act utilitarians, save per accidens as rules of thumb and as de facto social institutions
What did Sidgwick think about the spread of utilitarianism?
Limit the spread as mass public reach these ends anyways with their decisions
What did Smart think about educating others on utilitarianism?
With the increasingly-connected world we live in there cannot be self-containing acts anymore so all require utilitarian thought
What does Smart think about the almanac case of Mill?
Given that if direct calculations were taken instead of taking readings from the almanac, it would be irrational to support the almanac when these differed - therefore Mill is still an act utilitarian
How does Sidgwick divide utility of events?
Utility of action and utility of praise of it - different, as right action can be rationally condemned ie saving the drowning Hitler
How does Smart see rules within society?
Not reasons for action but anthropocentric datum for planning actions
Why does Smart see act utilitarianism as intrinsically good?
It appeals to benevolence, and what trait can be better?
How does Smart define the key terms for morality?
Right action is the most rational one, a good action is one that should have the motive praised
Why does Railton criticise utilitarianism?
The alienation of yourself due to impartiality requirements, as well as bifurcation of thought between affections and rationality is wrong
How does Railton fix the paradox of hedonism?
Subjective hedonism - take actions which are most likely to reach maximum utility
Objective hedonism - actually attempt to reach the states required for maximum utility such as friendship (sophisticated hedonists)
Why is Mill seen as an act utilitarian in the first instance?
He argues rules of action must take character and colour from the end to which they are subservient
Why does Mill expect that it to be rational to support higher pleasures?
They are those which are dignified and far from the animal state that we should wish to avoid, same as Socrates and fool idea
How does Mill work rules into his argument?
Support for rules where observance is expedient to a much higher degree, and the idea of the path of morality, towards happiness, guided by secondary principles
Why does Urmson think Mill was a rule utilitarian?
Use of secondary principles that all us to not have to test every action directly. In addition, Mill generalises utility for type, not token actions
What does Quinton believe are higher pleasures?
Achievements that have no definite bodily aspect and must be worked at over a longer period of time
Why does Mill support rules for Quinton and why is this good?
Actions that tend to promote happiness supported, so less time spent in deliberation
Why does Quinton find fault in utilitarianism?
Proportion of responsibility of a certain act is vanishingly small as multiple causes for one event
Why does Crisp see act utilitarianism as impossible?
The development of partialities is moralised, so that it is impossible to become impartial
Why does Plamenatz reject Mill?
Morality is more complex than Mill describes, and sociologists see morality as something that is useful to the society, beyond happiness
Why must utilitarians not have fixed rules?
In order to avoid extreme conservatism
Why does Mabbott reject secondary principles as rules?
They are derived from the principal aim, and there is the chief exception to them still that they are rejected when things are bad
Why are rules intrinsically good and bad?
They engender the good within you, yet if this is against happiness then not good
How does Dower view justice and care in terms of time frames?
Justice, as a more backward-looking approach, requires compensation for those affected by injustice, care is more forward
How does Dower combine justice and care?
He sees care as a duty than can be as important as justice
How does Baier seen women’s study of morality as different?
Less interest in the construction of moral theories or comprehensive doctrines - mosaic method used
How does Baier enjoin justice and care?
Use of trust, or exposing our throats so we become accustomed to not biting
What is Baier’s problem with justice?
It is too based around coercion rather than trusting others to do an action and have certain values of justice - self-trust is key therefore
What mutual benefit is there for supporting trust?
Cooperative relations are important for both men and women, so being able to cooperate morally is valuable
Why does Kelly support partiality?
We must all be entitled to some measure of personal autonomy to develop and foster partial concerns in the form of projects or relationships - allow autonomy which is compatible with the fundamental interests of all
Why does Kelly see personal concern as so vital in morals?
It is where our moral concern originated, so as long as we check our partiality with moral concern we should be fine
Why does Kelly criticise personal concern?
The reasons for it are arbitrary, and the moral status of persons should not be for no reason. Also, people will not agree on how to express personal concern unlike with moral concern, since reasons are arbitrary - therefore no rationale to make it full moral doctrine
Why do women differ from men for Rachels/Gilligan?
Higher sensitivity to the needs of others, and women care more about deeper relationships than male wide networks
How does Rachels evaluate care?
Supplementing tradition theories rather than replacing them, and care as a part of virtue ethics
How does Nussbaum view patriotism?
A morally questionable move of self-definition by a morally independent characteristic
How is politics ruined by care for Nussbaum?
Political life will be repeatedly sabotaged by partisan loyalties if there is only partiality - cosmopolitanism required. Also leads to assumption that the options familiar to us are the only ones
How does Nussbaum criticise Gilligan?
Even though we do not really think our children are more morally important than others, we still give them far more care - Gilligan is mixing up morals with actions, morals should be explaining actions
How does Kant see partiality?
As emotional capriciousness
Why is care problematic for Herman?
All helping actions are not also right actions
How does Herman see obligation and care?
Obligation is a limiting factor to actions driven by care, as obligation alone does not allow personal character to build - rules are impersonal
How does Sommers support impartiality?
Differential pull idea, where convention practice, relationships and roles set the nature and force of moral obligation - still impartial as maximising utility still
Why are personal relations so important for Sommers?
We are social animals, so when we do violence to a social role like filial duty, it is worse than a breach of promise due to loss of dignity - therefore care is key
Why is personal concern problematic for Sommers?
Sentimental ties may become unravelled at the disadvantage of others
How does Goodin assess care?
Vulnerability is the source of care that extends one’s special responsibilities, often involuntary
What do Nell and O’Neill believe about justice?
Causal influence and knowledge leads to duty to save others. We are all innocent threats to one another in a scarcity situation, so justice has to rule over care to maximise survival ie kill burdensome
How does Scheffler see care?
To value a relationship is to see yourself as having special responsibilities, and you feel you have good reasons for this - yet this is a circular argument
What does Scheffler point out as a reason for care?
There are reasons to act that would not have existed in absence of the relationship - yet these are arbitrary
How does Gilligan see women as different?
Differences in social status, power and reproductive biology leads to greater orientation towards relationships and interdependence
How does Gilligan see care and justice as different?
Idea of care v idea of perfection, responsibilities v rights, premise of nonviolence v premise of equality
Why should care and justice both be accepted for Gilligan?
They allow for a better understanding of relations between the sexes, with a more comprehensive portrayal of adult work and family relationship
How does Nolt reply to impartiality?
You are better placed to help those close to you
Why is the bystander effect important to impartiality?
Even though we are less likely to help when there are more people to do so such as in charity, this is an explanation of actions in terms of social influence rather than a justification
Which movement did Singer inspire?
Effective altruism. giving to the most effective charity to improve marginal utility
How can rule utilitarians overcome impartiality and not?
Rules such as cherish your friends may help utility, but leads to impersonal motivation for friend cherishing still
How does Gotama try to overcome suffering?
4 Noble Truths, ending in crushing your cravings in order to avoid suffering
How does Buddhism become impartiality-supporting?
Since no self exists, and instead life is seen as a momentary phenomena, we should not value others over ourselves - follow compassion/Karana
What is the main difference between Singer and Buddhism?
Singer uses reason, whilst Buddhist argue that feeling is key to ensure universal compassion
How is Aristotle supportive of the ethics of care?
Friendship is a virtue, and friends should be cherished
Who created the 1950s test that triggered Gilligan?
Kohlberg, replied to In a Difference Voice
How does Gilligan see ethics as changing?
It is becoming more bilingual across the sexes
What are classical philosopher’s views on animal rights?
Aristotle - reason separates beings
Descartes - animals are mechanisms like clocks
Kant - not duty towards animals, only their owners
What terms does Singer use to describe animals?
Moral patients inside the moral circle
How many animals are killed for food a year?
45 billion
What is Parfit’s repugnant conclusion?
Having the least births at possible can increase utility
What is Singer’s belief on rational and non-rational beings?
Those rational and self-conscious should not face replaceability argument, unlike others, allowing for painless deaths if saving others
What is the problem with the replaceability argument?
Should we not be protecting the most vulnerable in society? Singer argues that we should change our intuitions
What is the problem with Singer’s act utilitarianism for meat eating?
A single conversion potentially will not cause a reduction in suffering - therefore rule utilitarianism required as tipping point problem brought up by Regan
What is the argument for animals suffering as less bad?
Budiansky - experiences turn emotions is something far worse than mere pain, and ability to reflect on meaning of pain
What is the response to the argument that animals’ suffering is less bad?
Pain is always pain, one way or another, and also due to lack of mental capacity the uncertainty caused in some cases increases pain
What is the partialist problem with the animal liberation idea?
Since, for Benson, we have a spontaneous person concern to those close to us, that which is the beginning of moral development, then the impartiality across species asked for by Singer is undermining natural partialism
How does Regan regard animals?
If they are subjects of life, having beliefs, desires, memory and a sense of future, then they have inherent value
Where is the line for Regan’s subject of life?
At least all mammals over 1 years old
What are two problems with Regan’s theory?
Fuzzy edges of moral circle, and given dogs cannot consent to stroking them, can we do that?
Which type of equality does Singer aim for?
Equality of consideration, so that different treatment is given to different species but all equally considered
Why does Singer reject inequality or hierarchy?
There has been no evidence to show that from race or sex we can infer anything else, so factual inequality should not impact on moral equality (a prescription of how to treat people)
How does Singer use the lack of human equality to fight for animal rights?
Given that intelligence or rationality is not a discriminator among humans for their moral worth, why should this not be held for animals?
What is the lowest common denominator for nonhuman animals?
Suffering, as a prerequisite for having any interests at all - held far more by adult mammals than the infant human
How does Singer view the value of different animals?
As a continuum from simple capacity for pain to a more complex capacity
How does Singer appear Kantian?
He states that animals have some kind of dignity or worth
How does Singer reject old philosophers?
Their ‘obscurantist mumbo jumbo’ was wrong, as not fair to take advantage of imbecile, but fair to take advantage of the dog
What is Regan’s problem with current views on animals?
We view them as our resources, or means to our ends. Some argue for indirect duties towards animals as well, such as having duties regarding animals - not respectful of their intrinsic worth
What is the contractarian view?
Those who can agree to a set of moral rights and responsibilities receive them, if not, no moral standing - rejected as animals cannot sign, but neither can other humans and blacks historically
What is the problem with utilitarianism for Regan?
Not equal inherent worth of individuals, and also the kind act is not always the right act (under cruelty-kindness theory). Also, morally callous results of utilitarianism found ie killing for higher utility
What is the underpinning of Regan’s rights view?
My value as an individual is independent of my usefulness to you, with strong focus on individual welfare for subjects of a life
How does Callicot view the animal rights debate?
Triangular, between humanists, animal rights supporters and land rights environmentalists
What is the categorical imperative of Aldo Leopold?
The good of the biotic community in terms of integrity and stability of the ecology
How do animal rights supports and land rights supporters disagree on animals?
Hunting acceptable if helps ecology, also predators which normally are seen as bad for causing suffering, are seen as valuable if good to keep ecological stability
How does land rights differ to animal rights in terms of individualism?
Atomism and idea of rights of Bentham rejected in preference to integrated ecology with plants and animals dependent on each other - holistic
How should land be seen for Leopold?
Not just instrumentally valuable but valued for the sake of itself
How does the land rights approach view different species?
Rather than equal concern, those who are rarer and more at threat in the stability of the ecology should be valued more. Also native plant and animals more valuable than domestic ones (environmental entitlement)
Why does the land rights approach not support the liberation of farm animals?
They have been made docile due to domestic nature, and would die if let free causing agony - an ironic ending. Either that, or adapt and cause instability in ecology such as mules in America. Therefore meaningless claim to liberate animals
Why does Callicot disagree with removing pain from nature?
Pain, or the fight for survival, is nature in it’s element so it would be ridiculous to remove it
Why does Callicot disagree with vegetarianism?
The vast expansion in human population would further ruin the environment as greens are more efficient as further down the trophic levels (also field space?)
What is wrong with factory farms for the land rights view?
Animals are seen as mechanisms rather than parts of their ecology - idea of organic society than cannot be taken apart - however the actual eating of animals is natural and organic for humans
