Keller Final Flashcards
Similarites between Act v. Rule Utilitarianism
Similarities:
Greatest Happiness Principle
we ought to always do whatever brings about the greatest balance of pleasure over pain for everyone affected by the action
- utilitarianim relies on this
- act ut. applies it to actions
Higher v. Lower Pleasures
- Jeremy Bentham had a hedonistic view of pleasure that defined pleasure on the basis of the physical stimulus produced by certain activities.
- John Stuart Mill revised Bentham’s view by making a distinction between higher and lower pleasures. Mill argues that to make a human happy, as opposed to an animal, one needs a higher sort of pleasure that is preferable to lower, physical pleasures.
- Mill argues that when applying the Greatest Happiness Principle, this distinction between higher pleasures and lower pleasures ought to be taken into account
- happiness consists of primarily of high quality pleasure and absence of pain
- Mill: only intrinsic good is pleasure measured in terms of quality plus intensity and duration
- Bentham: only intrinsic good os pleasure in terms of intensity and duration.
Utilitarianism
- form of Consequentialism
- say that happiness makesconsequescnes better or worse
- according the Utils: an action is right if and only of those acts available to the agent in those circumstances, it would produce greatest total net happiness
Consequentialism
- permissibility of action depends on goodness or badness of conseqeunce of it
- right actions maximize good consequences
Main objection to Act U
- makes false prediction about what is right (carving someone up to harvest organs, killing..)
- says says we should blame and punish people for things that aren’t their fault if doing so had good consequences
- If I must choose between these options:
A: involves killing, lying and stealing and produces 100 units of pleasure
B: involves none of the above and produces 99 units pleasure
I am morally required to choose A according to AU - But I am not morally required to choose A, morally it seems plausible to choose B.
- Hence AU is false
Other probs: no measure for happiness, no guaranteed consqueuences, killing lying stealing are immoral
Main objection to Rule U
- seems incoherent: avoids problems with AU by abandoning spirit of consequentialism/util. Doesn’t explain why we should follow the rules in circumstance where doing so will NOT produce net pleasure
- it seems like we should rule against killing stealing etc. BUT in some instances, breaking rules would produce most pleasure
- If all that matters morally are consequences of an action, how can it be wrong to maximize good consequences by carving me up?
- abandons Util, doesn’t modify it
Deontology (Kant)
focuses on intention (KANT)
actions (act types) are of primary and intrinsically moral value (lying is intrinsically wrong)
-the end never justifies the means
-fairness and justice matter, the morality of an action does not depend entirely on its consequences
-immoral actions are irrational
-two tests
-he thinks theory will stop lying stealing killing which contrasts consequentialism b/c there’s no prohibition
-looks for the goal, not the consequence
Maxims
- statement of reasons for your action
- states what you’re going to do (intention) and Why (reason)
- an actions rightness depends on its maxim and whether it was a good reason
Hypothetical reasons/imperitaves
a hypothetical reason resin in form of “If you have goal A, then do B”
- amolristis think all reasons are hypothetical and that the only reasons we have depend on our goals
- imperative that is based on some desired goal or outcome in the world. Since there are no goals in the world that can be demonstrated to be fully universal, “hypothetical imperatives” cannot be universal.
Categorical reasons
- in the form of “Do B”
- don’t depend on our goals
- Kant thinks all moral reasons are categorical
- uses the Principle of Universilizability and Principle of Humanity which means that whatever I do ought to be able to be universalized
- Kant evaluates the moral worth of an action based upon the principle calledThe principle is an “imperative” because it is a command or an “ought.” It is “categorical” because it is based on pure reason.
- universal because it is not based on any outcome in the world but is true on the strength of its own rationality
Formula of Unviersal Law
- categorical imperative, aka principle of universalizability
-emphazized fairness
-act is morally acceptable if its maxim is universalizable
right actions are those that are done for the right reasons and the right ones are universailaizable
-would it make sense for everyone to do it? Would your goal be achieved?
virtue
a good habit or excellent character trait
- intellectual: good thinking habits
- moral:good behavior and actions
The golden mean
the intermediate or “mean” between two extremes (two vices) is what we ought to do
- ex: courage is the mean between cowardice and rashness
- it takes practical wisdom to determine golden means
Aristotle thought:
- The distinctive function of something depends on its distinctive characteristics
- our distinctively human characteristic: rationality
- our distinctive function is to exercise our theoretical and practical rational capacities excellently
- so a good well functioning human exercises theoretical and practical rational capacities excellently
Virtue Ethics
an approach that focuses not he virtues as opposed to the consequences or reasons for acting (deontology)
-teleological
teleology
- goal oriented and has a function or purpose given by nature and for non natural things, purposes intense by their creators
- ex: function of knife is to cut
- can be eliminated or reduced to historical facts about the evolution of the heart, etc.
natural function
“goals” of natural things, what intended to do
Aristotle thinks eudaimonia (happiness) is connected to pleasure, pleasure does not define it. Rather, eudaimonia is the activity of performing one’s function well. By understanding one’s function, then, one can understand how to have an excellent character
practical wisdom
to have it you met be good at figuring out what to do
- be rational and clever
- helps determine which goals to pursue not just how to achieve them
- aristotle thinks that good actions were ones tat flowed from excellent exercise of practical rationality
- good actions can only be produced by virtuous people
indirect violations fo goods
occur when no matter what we do some human good will be destroyed
ie: when we can save a life b lying, save a life by taking a life, etc?
unintentional
direct violations
involve intentional destruction or prevention of a good and we never have to do that.
Aquinas ‘ list of goods
intrinsic goods: human life human procreation human knowledge human sociability reasonable conduct
Formula of Humanity (PRinciple of Humanity)
Categorical Impertive test: always treat a human being (yourself included) as en end, and never as a mere means
concerns:humanity, ends, and means, “Don’t use people”
Primary principles of practical reasons
good is to be done and evil avoided
we can’t understand the idea o an “action” that was done because it was seen as evil
but one can’t simply do “good” one has to pursue some specific good
3 things that matter to this: humanity, end, and means
“Don’t use people”
Goods
right actions that respond properly to things that are intrinsically good or valuable according to Natural law theory
Secondary principles of practical reasons
-ten commandments
variety of intrinsic goods: life, procreation, knowledge, society, and reasonable conduct=generate a variety of secondary principles
don’t kill, lie, steal,etc…rules to follow
Doctrine of Double Effect
Many actions that aim at the promotion of one human good may negatively affect others. The Principle of Double Effect is a way of determining how to act when an action has a desired good effect but in order to achieve that effect a bad effect also results. The principle holds that it is wrong to think that the ends ever justify the means. However, if the undesirable effect is truly a secondary effect and unintended, it is justifiable if the good of the primary effect outweigh the secondary effect.
definition of DDE
- The act itself must be morally good or at least indifferent.
- The agent may not positively will the bad effect but may permit it. If he could attain the good effect without the bad effect he should do so. The bad effect is sometimes said to be indirectly voluntary.
- The good effect must flow from the action at least as immediately (in the order of causality, though not necessarily in the order of time) as the bad effect. In other words the good effect must be produced directly by the action, not by the bad effect. Otherwise the agent would be using a bad means to a good end, which is never allowed.
- The good effect must be sufficiently desirable to compensate for the allowing of the bad effect (p. 1021).
four condition for applying DDE
- intrinsic permissibility: the action in question apart from its effects is morally permissible-isn’t direct violation
- necessity: its is not possibly to bring about the good effects except by perforing an action that will bring about th evil effect in question 9or some other equally evil effect)
- Nonintentionality: the evil effec is not intended-it is neither one’s end nor a chosen means for bringing about some intended end
- Proportionality: the evil that will be brought about thy the action is not our of proportion to the good being aimed at.
deon
duty or obligation
ology
science
treating someone as an end
treating them with respect they deserve
treatimg someone as a means
dealing with them so that they help you attain goals
Explain Formula of Humanity of the Categorical Imperative,
give an example, and what’s the main problem?
Formulation:
- formulate your maxim clearly
- imagine a world where everyone supports and acts on your maxim
- ask whether the goal of your action can be achieved in that world
Ex: speeding down the Emergency lane. In this world where everyone drove in it to avoid traffic jams, the lane would jam and the goal would not be attainable, therefore you shouldn’t do it
Problem: some things pass universalizablity test like someone who wants to rob a bank to put it out of business. If we all do, it will get us the desired goal, but it’s not a good reason so they wouldn’t be acting rightly. Hence you can obey the principle of universaliz. and still act immorally
objections to the Formula of Humanity
-it is possible to obey the principe and act immorally (bank robbing case)
Explain Principle of Humanity of the Categorical Imperative,
give an example, and what’s the main problem?
You should always treat a human being (yourself included) as and end and never as a mere means
Example: a plumber coming to fix a leak. As long as you treat her with respect an dignity she is not only a means but an end which is ok.
Problem: The notion of treating someone as en end is vague and so its hard to apply. i.e. does publishing gossip columns, laying land mines, or ignoring the starving involve treating celebs, solider, or starving ppl as a mere means?
the main objection to the Formula of Humanity
the notion of treating someone as en end is vague so its hard to apply
-gossip columns, ignoring starving people, etc…
Duty
a primary responsibility
For Kant, for an action to have moral worth, it must come from duty
If one acts from a pure duty to obey the categorical imperative, one can act with necessity. In this way, a will can become a will that is good in itself, rather than be good simply relative to the world around it
ex: To use Kant’s example, for a shopkeeper to be moral, he must charge fair prices not because he has an inclination to improve business or an inclination to be nice but because the categorical imperative commands it
Inclination
emotional desire to act in a certain way
doesn’t have same fore as duty
can never be truly universal because it is not based on reason but experience
doing your duty v. an action having moral worth
doing your duty would be following the categorical imperative because it is the right or moral thing to do.
for an actiong to have moral worth it must come form having a good will
-one thing is intrinsically good:good will and acting from duty to uphold the categorical imperative
-for an action to have moral worth it must come from duty and not merely inclination to do the right thing for the wrong reasons
happiness and life
Eudaimonia (happiness) depends on performing one’s function well. To do this, one must develop arete (virtue). Arete in Greek means “virtue in the sense of excellence.” Aristotle identifies two types of virtue based on two parts of the soul: ethical virtue which is based on the appetitive part of the soul and intellectual virtue which is based on the rational part of the soul.
Natural law theory
This is a principle-based ethics that derives moral laws from the order of nature. While there are many natural law theorists, the most influential version of the theory was developed by St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) who drew heavily on Aristotle’s notion of natural function.
Aquinas’ natural law theory is founded on the primary precept of practical reason, which he claims is self-evident. It states, “Good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided.”
-need practical wisdom in some cases
-forbids destroying ro thwarting goods
Why a hysterectomy may be permissible under DDE
- nomrally you would be detroygn a primary good:human procreation by doing this,
- but
