Lecture 10 Flashcards
Objectives:
understand the role of value judgements
distinguish between moral, legal, and aesthetic reasoning
understanding value judgments
definition: assessments of merit, desirability, or praiseworthiness
examples: moral, nonmoral, and aesthetic value judgments
subjective reason = value judgment
the essence of moral reasoning
definition & importance:
- moral reasoning involves evaluating actions, decisions, or policies based on ethical frameworks and principles. it is central to our interactions and societal structures, guiding judgments on right and wrong
key concepts:
- good/bad: qualities assigned to actions or decisions based on their ethical outcomes or intentions
- right/wrong: determinations made about actions or decisions within the context of moral standards or laws
- justice: the principle of fairness and the equitable treatment of individuals, often balancing individual rights with the common good
moral deliberation: a process involving the consideration of various ethical principles, the consequences of actions, and the moral obligations owed to others. example: deciding whether to disclose a friend’s wrongdoing involves weighing the value of honesty against potential harm
dilemmas in moral reasoning: complex scenarios where competing moral values or principles clash, requiring nuanced thinking to resolve. example: the trolley problem, where choosing between two courses of action both lead to harm, but in different ways
how can you justify killing one pson to save another or a few?
principles of moral reasoning
consistency principle:
- fundamental to moral reasoning, this principle demands that similar cases be treated in similar ways unless there is a morally relevant difference between them
- application: this principle underlies the concept of justice and fairness, requiring that our moral judgments remain consistent across different scenarios unlessjustified by differences
- example: punishing two individuals differently for the same crime requires justification of a relevant difference
burden of proof:
- in situations where one’s actions appear to violate the consistency principle, the responsibility lies with that individual to justify their differentiation
- this places an emphasis on transparency and justification in moral decision-making, ensuring tht exceptions to general moral rules are clearly and rationally grounded
- example: if an employer offers a promotion t one employee over another equally qualifed candidate, they must justify the decision based on relevant differences
major perspectives in moral reasoning
- consequentialism andutilitarianism: outcomes determine morality
- virtue ethics: character and moral virtues as central
- deontologism: duty-based moral obligations
- moral relativism vs. absolutism: cultural vs. universal moral standards
legal reasoning: the structure
(overview of how legal systems apply principles to interpret laws and reach decisions)
- fundamental types of legal reasoning
- deductive reasoning: applying general legal principles to specific cases to derive a logicl conclusion - example: if all persons convicted of armed robbery must serve a minimum sentence (general principle), and john does not is convicted of armed robbery, then john doe must serve a minimum sentence (specific application) - inductie reasoning: drawing general principles from the observation of specific instances, often used to create new legislation or legal principles - example: after observing numerous cases of cybercrimes not adequately being addressed by existing laws, legislators infer the need for new, comprehensive cyber crime legislation - specific —> general
the role of precedent in legal reasoning (stare decisis)
- definition: the doctrine that courts will follow principles established in previous cases (precedent) in deciding similar cases
- importance: esures consistency and predictabilty in the law, thereby upholding the principle of fairness
- judges look at prior, relevant case law to guide their decisions, ensuring that like cases are treated alike
anlogical reasoning: making legal arguments by analogy
- how it works: lawyers compare the case at hand with previous cases to argue for a similar outcome
- key consideration: the relevancy of similarities and differences between the current case and the precedent cases
- example: a lawyer argues that their client’s case is substantially similar to a precedent where the court ruled in favour of the precedet’s defendant, asserting that the current case should therefore have a comparable ruling
- don’t exagerate, simplify logic (shouldn’t be wrong)
reasoning about cause and effect in law
- essential for establishing liability and deermining remedies
- involves assessing whether an action directly caused the harm or damage in question
- challenges: proving causation can be complex, especially in cases with multiple contributing factors or where the harm in indirect
interpretation of vague laws
- vagueness and ambguity: laws sometimes contain terms that are not clearly defined, leading to disputes about their application
- judicial interpretation: courts play a critical role in interpreting vague terms within laws to apply them to specific cases
- methodologies: literal interpretation, purposive approach (considering the law’s purpose), and the use of external aids like legislative history
justifying Laws: perspectives explored
legal moralism: morality as the grounds for legislation
- the view that the moral standards of a society can dictate the laws of the land
- prohibitions against murder or theft are based onmoral judgments about right and wrong
harm principle: protecting individuals from harm
- the principle that actions should only be legally restricted if they cause harm to others
- introduced by john struart mill in “on liberty”
- example: laws against drunk driving are justified because they prevent harm to others on the road
legal paternalism: preventing self-harm
- justification for law that involves preventing individuals from harming themselves
- example: helmet laws for motorcyclists or mandatory seat belts aimed at to protect indiiduals from their own potentially harmful decisions
- athletes trying to return to play (“slavery analogic)
- is it the state’s place to protect individuals from themselves? consider the balance between individual autonomy and societal duty to protect
- deemed unfit to make your own decisions (unconscious)
offense principle: preventing offense to others
- legislation can be justified if it prevents severe offense to members of society
- public decency laws, such as those against public nudity, are justified by the offense they might cause to others, rather than direct harm
can you think of law that restricts personal freedom for the sake of preventing harm to the wider society?
- drug regulations
- gun laws
understanding aesthetic reasoning
- aesthetic principles: guidelines for judging artistic vlue
- functions of art: teaching, conveying values, social/political changes
- subjective experiences: pleasure, emotional responses, autonomy
eight asethetic principles
1.meaningfulnes and truth
- art is a conduit for expressing truths about the human condition, socetal structures, or thenatural world
- example: literature, like george orwell’s “1984”, mirrors and critiques societal trends, potentially offering deep insights into truth and huma behaviour
- conveyance of vlaues or beliefs
- art reflects and transmits the value, beliefs, and traditions of its cultural context
- example: traditional african masks are not just art pieces but carry deep spiritual and cultural significance within their societies - capability to facilitate change
- art has the power to inspire social and political change, functioning as a catalyst for movements
- example: picaso’s “guernica” is a potent anti-war statement, influencing public opinion against the brutality of war - generation of pleasure
- aesthetic hedonism posits that art’s value lies in its capacity to generate pleasure or satisfaction
- example: the beauty of claude monet’s “water lilies” series can evoke a serene, pleasurable experience for viewers - elicitation of valued emotions
- art’s ability to evoke specific, valuable emotions is seen as a marker of its aesthetic worth
- why do we like movies bc they evoke emotion
- example: the tragedy in shakespeare’s “king lear” allows audiences to explore empathy and sorrow in a cathartic manner - induction of special experiences
- art can create unique, non-ordinary experiences, such as a feeling of transcendence or the suspension of disbelief
- example: surreal works like Salvador dali’s “the persistence of memory” invite viewers into an almost dream-like state, challenging their perception of reality - possession of aethetic propties or significant form
- some argue that art is valuable for its inherent beauty or its structuring of form and composition alone
- example: the balanced composition and harmonious colors in Leonardo da Vinci’s “the last supper” reveal an intrinsic aesthetic beauty —> mona lisa - subjectivity and taste
- this perspective holds that aesthetic judgments are purely subjective, based on individual tastes and preferences
- discussion: “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” — this age-old adage encapsulates the idea that art apprecation is highly personal and cannot b universally dictated
why reason aesthetically?
integration of facts and values
- art mrges factual elements (e.g. a painting’s composition) with values (e.g. beauty, chaos), demanding their integrtion for appreciation
developing aesthetic expertise
- engaging with art refines our perceptual tools adn enriches our aesthetic vocabulary, enhancing both personal appreciation anddiscourse
expanding vocabulary and shared perceptions
- a common aesthetic vocabulary allows individual experiences to be shared and understood across diverse viewers
appreciation through critical thinking
- reasoning aesthetically prompts active engagement with art, enabling deeper connections and insights into the artist’s intentions
the role of emotive force in aesthetic experience
- descriptive, emotive language shapes our aesthetic responses, guiding our appreciation adn understand of art
critical reflection expands agreement
- through reasoned discussion, subjective experiences of art can converge, fostering broader cultural understanding and connectivity
—> emotions play in majority of decsions
- not all logic
—> why you doing this?
- caue I feel like it
philosphy —> what is right what is wrong
psychology —> individual person why they act a certain way
sociology —> why we as a society acts a certain way
