Finding universal rules Flashcards
Mill, Kant
how utilitarianism can claim to provide objective answers to moral questions
by basing the judgment solely on the consequences of the actions (aims to maximize overall happiness, conforms to the utility principle)
what is the disagreement objection
the fact that we regularly disagree on moral issues disprove the claim that utilitarianism fails to provide objective answers to moral questions
Mills response to the disagreement objection
the potential for disagreement in beneficial and allows for testing and refinement of truth through debate
what is the debasement objection
idea that utilitarianism debases humans in that reduces human ideals and aspiration to the pursuit of pleasure
otherwise known as the swinish-pleasures objection
Mills response to the debasement objection
we have different kinds of pleasures than pigs (reason, knowledge, etc.) but people will choose the lower pleasures but the higher pleasures are better (competent judge will tell us so)
what is the limitation objection
utilitarianism is limited by our finite ability to anticipate the consequences of our actions
Mills response to the limitation argument
We must accep these limitations and grow so that we can be better at knowing what might happen
Kant’s criticism of utilitarianism
- happiness/pleasure does not always mean good
- point of ethics is to make us better at determining what is right not the consequences that follow
for Kant what is the real question
isn’t whether we should be moral but on what grounds morals can be universally binding (what makes them binding)
why the relation between freedom and nature is key to the moral puzzle in Kant’s view
- for morality to be possible, humans must be considered as free agents capable of making choices not solely determined by natural laws
- true moral action requires freedom of will
why does Kant stress the good will for assessing the moral worth of an action and not the consequence
- nothing is as good as the right intention behind an action
- things can be good but if that was not the intention it cannot be considered morally worthy
Kant’s difference between rational and natural beings
natural- governed by laws (gravity) and cannot deviated from them
rational- have a will and can act accordingly, make their own decisions
what is the will according to Kant
the ability to act in accordance with a conception of law (follow their principle)
what is a maxim
a subjective principle of action
the moral one adopts as their own
what is duty according to Kant
what prompts us to adopt the principle(law) as our maxim
what is acting from duty according to Kant
doing the right thing because you believe it is a moral obligation
- motivation comes only from duty with no personal desire/benefits
what is acting in conformity with duty according to Kant
simply doing the right thing because it is what is expected and brings personal gain/benefit
which has true moral worth: acting from duty or acting in conformity with duty?
acting from duty
what are examples of duties (discussed)
to preserve ones life, to be beneficent, to secure ones own happiness
why do we have duty to preserve ones life
if not you are using yourself as a means instead of as an end, which is morally wrong
why do we have duty to be beneficent
promotes happiness of others and the right thing to do
why do we have a duty to secure your own happiness
lack of happiness might tempt one to act out of self-interest instead of duty
makes it easier to do the right thing when presented a choice
what is an imperative
a command or an instruction to perform an action
what is a categorical imperative
a direct command that does not have any conditions
something one must do no matter what
difference between a means and an end according to Kant
the end is the goal and means are something to achieve that goal
Kant’s view as humanity as an end
people should not be used as a means to an end
the end of moral principle (the end in itself) is humanity
what is the formula of the law of nature
act as though the maxim (reasoning, will) of your actions were to become a universal law of nature
if it ends well, act by it, if not dont do it
formula of the law of humanity
act that you use humanity at the same time as an end and never only as the means
