MIDTERM 1 REVIEW: Flashcards
What type of ethics are we studying?
normative
What is a valid argument.
when the premises and conclusions are lined up in such a way where accepting the premise, means accepting the conclusion
What is soundness
argument that is both valid and true
What is and who thought of the idea of reflective equilibrium
John Rawles:
You state your beliefs about justice. However, you some event occurs that challenges your beliefs. Now you are left with a choice, give up your principles or give up the new idea that challenged your belief. By doing this, over and over (reflection), you bring your old beliefs and new ideas into equilibrium to create an ever adapting idea of what you think justice is.
What is and who came up with the idea of utilitarianism
Jeremy Bentham:
- the best thing for the greatest amount of people.
- also referred to as consequentialism
- decisions are made from the viewpoint of an impartial/disinterested spectator.
What is and who came up with the idea of utilitarianism
Jeremy Bentham:
- the best thing for the greatest amount of people.
- also referred to as consequentialism
- decisions are made from the viewpoint of an impartial/disinterested spectator.
What is and who came up with the idea of deontology
Immanuel Kant:
- Categorial imperatives; focus on two.
(1) Universality principle; can your belief be justified in all situations.
(2) Humanity - people are ends not means.
What is and who came up with the idea of deontology
Immanuel Kant:
- Categorial imperatives; focus on two.
(1) Universality principle; can your belief be justified in all situations.
(2) Humanity - people are ends not means.
- for example if you ask someone to give you money to buy a textbook but instead buy candy you are deceiving the person and are taking away their free will to choose. Therefore you are treating them as means which should never be permissible.
- therefore, actions such as lying and stealing are never ethical.
Who created the trolley problem? How is the original problem different from the large man variation.
Philippa Foot
- Intent to harm vs unintended consequence.
- Believes that it is morally permissible to switch the lever.
- Large man variation; foot does not believe it is permissible to push the large man.
- The difference according to her is the doctrine of double-effect. It is sometimes permissible to perform an action that causes serious harm such as the death of the human being as a side effect of promoting a good end.
- The action that is intended must be morally good, with the risk of a foreseen unideal effect.
- There is another requirement. the bad effect must not be used as a means of bringing about the good effect (like in the large man variation). This makes a distinction between the two cases.
- In the large man variation, the person uses the death of large man as a means to bring about the good affect. however, in the trolley problem does not need the one person on the other track to bring about the good outcome. The action would be just as effective if there was no people or even two people on the track. The death of the one worker is therefore a foreseen bad effect but is not a means to the good outcome.
Who created the trolley problem? How is the original problem different from the large man variation.
Philippa Foot
- Intent to harm vs unintended consequence.
- Believes that it is morally permissible to switch the lever.
- Large man variation; foot does not believe it is permissible to push the large man.
- The difference according to her is the doctrine of double-effect. It is sometimes permissible to perform an action that causes serious harm such as the death of the human being as a side effect of promoting a good end.
- The action that is intended must be morally good, with the risk of a foreseen unideal effect.
- There is another requirement. the bad effect must not be used as a means of bringing about the good effect (like in the large man variation). This makes a distinction between the two cases.
- In the large man variation, the person uses the death of large man as a means to bring about the good affect. however, in the trolley problem does not need the one person on the other track to bring about the good outcome. The action would be just as effective if there was no people or even two people on the track. The death of the one worker is therefore a foreseen bad effect but is not a means to the good outcome.
What did Jean Paul Satre believe in the case of Dirty Hands?
- He was an existentialist (comminist)
- freedom of choice, event the worst of actions cannot be done without the consent of the individual.
- For the greater good. Dirty hands is a situation in which, even if someone does the morally right things, the person has also done something morally wrong. The moral wrongness does not evaporate simply in the virtue of the rightness act. Damed if you do damed if you don’t.
What did Machiavelli believe in regards to dirty hands?
Machiavelli; the prince.
- Political realist: analyzed right and wrong in terms of power. The aims of princes; glory in survival. Believes in getting your hands dirty, at any costs, if necessary for self preservation and prospering.
What is moral remainders:
to experience regret and remorse after a moral problem has been solved.
What is private morality?
The morality and moral requirements and considerations present in one’s personal affairs, whether or not those affairs are private.
Public Morality or Role Morality:
the morality and moral requirements and considerations present when one has a public person, role or position.
