Introduction for 25 Markers Flashcards
What would your introduction be for an essay on wether the Tripartite definition of knowledge is successful?
Within the study of knowledge there are two distinct conditions, necessary and sufficient which aim to allow us to provide a definition for knowledge in these terms. The Tripartite definition on many occasions can be seen as successful however upon further analysis fails to ‘guarantee’ knowledge in the war it claims. Even when the definition is amended to strengthen it through the incorporation of no false lemmas or infallibilism, in most cases the ‘sufficient conditions’ are met and yet knowledge is not present. Therefore overall I would argue the tripartite definition for knowledge is not successful which I will demonstrate throughout the course of this essay.
What would your introduction be for an essay on wether Kantian Deontological ethics is successful/convincing?
It is certainly arguable that Kantian deontological ethics is a convincing ethical theory. Kant’s emphasis toward fulfilling moral duties and being motivated by good will as opposed to a more hedonistic approach, whereby the primary emphasis is on maximising happiness, is evidently positive. However Kantian deontology does face several issues and objections due to Kant’s apparent misunderstanding about ‘the value of certain motives’ and ‘partiality’ and in many cases the strict nature of his ethics leads it to becoming too idealistic and thus unreflective of human nature. Consequently I would argue Kantian deontology is a partially convincing ethical theory, which I will demonstrate throughout the course of this essay.
What would your introduction be for an essay on wether Utilitarianism as a whole is successful (broad)
Utilitarianism in its basic form is a quantitative hedonistic ethical theory which argues that happiness, defined as pleasure and the absence of pain, is the only good and thus we should aim to maximise happiness for the greatest number and that actions are morally right or wrong solely dependent on the consequences alone. However there are many variations of utilitarianism including Jeremy Bethams Act utilitarianism and Rule utilitarianism alongside non-hedonistic forms such as Preference. Nevertheless all forms of utilitarianism face objection, which in most cases, severely undermine the basis of there arguments. Consequently I would argue no form of utilitarianism successfully provides a plausible ethical theory which I will demonstrate throughout the course of this essay.
What would your introduction be for an essay on wether Act Utilitarianism specifically is successful?
Act Utilitarianism is a quantitative hedonistic ethical theory articulated by philosopher Jeremy Bentham which essentially argues we should aim to maximise utility for the greatest number of people. However, Act’s strict emphasis on happiness being the only good which governs us as human beings sparks many criticisms, such as Nozick’s experience machine and problems with bentham’s calculator, which in many cases, severely undermines the argument. However even alternative forms of utilitarianism including Preference and Rule face criticism which similarly weaken there argument such as tyranny of the majority and smart’s objection to ‘rule worship’ and rules protecting individuals moral integrity, which initially seems positive but upon analogy can be potentially problematic. Overall I would argue that no form of utilitarianism provides a plausible ethical theory which I will demonstrate over the course of this essay.
What would your introduction be for an essay on wether Direct Realisms successful?
Direct realism is the perceptual theory which asserts that we perceive physical objects which exist objectively of our minds + perceptions directly. Direct realists argument sparks a variety of objections, which on many occasions the theory successfully counters, such as Bernard Russell’s argument of perceptual variation and the argument of hallucination. However there are also some criticisms which it fails to overcome such as the time lag argument which I would argue somewhat undermines direct realism claim. Overall I would argue Direct Realism is a partially convincing perceptual theory which i will demonstrate throughout the course of this essay.
What would your introduction be for an essay on wether Aristotelian virtue ethics is successful/ convincing?
Aristotleian virtue ethics essentially juxtaposes many conventional ethical theories through his claim that ultimately there is no finite set of rules or algorythm to become a morally just or virtuous person. Our ergon and purpose is to be guided by reason and to live in accordance with the virtues of human beings and places emphasis on the need for practical wisdom, education and habit in order to be a virtuous individual. On the one hand, the vague nature of aristotelian virtue ethics can be analysed as a strength of the moral theory, however by contrast it is precisely this vagueness which paves the way for the objections against it including the issues of guidance on how to act, circularity and conflicts between virtues which aristotle does counter however in repetitive nature. Overall I would argue aristotelian virtue ethics is a successful moral theory which I will demonstrate throughout the course of this essay.
