Moral philosophy Flashcards
What is Moral anti-realism?
Non-cognitivist theory (ethical language doesn’t express beliefs, not true or false)
-Claims moral properties do not exist as mind-independent phenomena
-Since moral judgments do not describe the world and are not true/false
There are not any mind-independent moral properties that make moral judgments true/false
E.g., “racist is wrong” is not claiming racism has any property, it’s just disapproval of racism
What is Kants distinction between acting in accordance with duty, and acting out of duty?
Acting in Accordance with duty: carrying out what duty commands that they do, but not carrying it out because they recognise this as a duty, but for some other reason, meaning the action has no moral worth (Eg. A shop owner deals honestly with inexperienced customers because they don’t want to lose customers)
Acting out of duty: carrying out what duty commands that they do, because they have recognised this as their duty and not for any other reason, meaning the action has moral worth (Eg. a shop owner who is honest because they recognise this as their moral duty to carry out
Explain Hume’s argument on why moral judgements aren’t beliefs
Against Moral realism
P1- Beliefs by themselves can never motivate us to act, nor cause any other states that do
P2-Moral judgements motivate us to act
C1- Therefore moral judgements cannot be beliefs
What are Aristotles virtue ethics
Summary for 2019 12 marker
-Based around the development of a good moral character
- Eudamonia is the ultimate goal/end, human flourishing, the good life for human beings
Aristotles account of moral virtues/doctrine of the mean:
Virtues are characteristics that enable a thing to achieve a good, and are excellences, which form good moral character in humans
Moral virtues are excellence in relation to behaviour, and are dispositions (tendencies to behave in a particular way) which are aquired through obervation, instruction and experience
Virtues lie in between two vices (vice of excess and deficiency) eg. Capacity: anger Defiency: Weak Virtue: Assertiveness Excess: Aggressive
Simulated killing
2019 12 marker: how aristotle virtue ethics can be applied to SK
Simulated killing- Enactment of a dramatisation of killing within a fictional context
Philosophers questiont the morality of witnessing a simulated killing
Carrying out simulated killing may damage the character of the witness eg. It could potentially prevent the habituation of their virtues, and could encourage viciousness and aggression
What is Utilititarianism?
25 marker is utilitarianism right to max utility
utilitarianism is the moral theory that decides whether actions are right or not based on their consequences (Bentham)
The best actions are the ones that maximise utility for the greatest number (Principle of utility)
Act utilitarianism is the believe that we should act in the way that produces the most utility for the most people, an action is good if it brings about more pleasure than pain
Bentham: No individuals happiness is more important than anybody elses
What is tyranny of the majority
25 marker is utilitarianism right to max utility
Argues against utilitarianism (specifically act), claims that it ignores fairness and the rights of the individual over the majority if it maximises utility
P1- A murder takes place and a crowd of 10000 is seeking revenge
P2-It would make the crowd happy to see revenge
P3- The police can’t catch the murderer, and plot to frame an innocent man
P4-If the crowd believe he’s the murderer, they will be happy whether its the real murderer or not
P5- Since the crowd happiness outweighs the innocent man, act utilitarianism would see no issue with this
C1-This makes Utilitarianism unfair and immoral as maximising utility goes against morals
What is Rule utilitarianism
25 marker is utilitarianism right to max utility
The argument that there should be general rules that should be followed when achieving utility
Actions are good if they follow these suitable rules and will result in an increased utility/happiness
Although punishing the man would lead to greater utility, it could also lead to more unhappiness
What is Nozick’s experience machine
25 marker is utilitarianism right to max utility
Questions about the truth of psychological hedonism, aims to show that utility/pleasure is not all humans care about
P1)Nozick’s experience machine allows us to become a subject of our own desires, experiencing the pleasure and happiness that comes from them both
P2)When we enter the machine our memories will be tinkered with
P3)most people would be reluctant to plug into the machine as the pleasures or happiness that results would not be produced by actually achieving our goals, even though the act would suggest we do as it creates the greatest happiness (act utilitarianism would ignore our personal preference)
C1)This makes Mill and Bentham’s hedonism/principle of utility wrong as happiness and pleasure aren’t the only things of value, and we aren’t just motivated by pleasure
Also proves that humans also care about experiences being real and desires coming true
What is preference utilitarianism?
25 marker is utilitarianism right to max utility
Non-hedonistic approach to utilitarianism, aims to counter the experience machine
We should act in a way that maximizes the preferences of others, not maximizing overall happiness
A good act is one that maximizes the preferences of others
Preference utilitarianism would argue that we should respect peoples preferences to live in the real world rather than the experience machine, unlike act utilitarianism which would suggest going into the machine which maximises happiness
For example the deceased person has a wish of having their money donated to charity when they pass, so we should fulfill that wish as we would maximise their preference. Even though it wouldn’t make them happier as they are dead
The difference between cognitivism and non cognitvism
Cognitivism: The belief that ethical language/moral sentences e.g., “killing is wrong” express beliefs, which have truth values (can either be true or false), and are propositions (things that have truth values)
Non cognitivism: Ethical language does not express beliefs, but some other non-cognitive mental state.
Ethical language/claims are not propositions (so they cannot be true or false), and they do not try to describe the world
Explain why utilitarianism has an issue with Partiality
Utilitarianism: an act is only morally right if we can predict that doing it produces utility
Hedonistic: utility are pleasures or happiness, something experienced by a being
Suggests utilitarianism is an incomplete moral theory as it doesn’t recognise moral relationships/duties
Morality requires us to be partial rather than to act on the basis that the greatest happiness for the greatest number should be achieved
Example: Woman involved in boating accident, with husband and boat owner, she can only save one person
Husband is saved, boat owner drowns
The wife justifies her decision by saying that she saved her husband only because he is a doctor, and more good would result from him being saved
Utilitarianism fails to recognise that morality involves partiality, and is unrealistic in its demands that people act for the greatest happiness for the greatest numbe
Explain Mackie’s Error theory
The error theory is a cognitivist theory claiming that ethical language is cognitively meaningful and that there are mind independent moral facts
Its also an anti realist theory that claims moral judgements are true/false and there are no such things as mind independent moral facts/properties
Aristotles view on how we develop moral character
12 marker: expain this, and how its challenged by circularity
Moral character: one that possessses virtues and they are stable traits of ones character, we don’t have these by nature but we have the capability to become virtuous
We aquire virtues by learning them through a combination of instruction, observation and practice
and this must become a habit
Eg. We can only learn to play the harp by practicing the harp, not just gaining knowledge about harp playing
A fully virtious act is one where the agent knows what the yare doing, and chooses to do it for its own sake
The Issue of circularity (Aristotle)
12 marker: expain this, and how its challenged by circularity
Aims to show how Aristotle does little to inform us about the nature of virtous acts
P1-Aristotle defines a virtuous act as one that is done by a virtous person in a situation, and defines a virtious person as someone who is disposed to do virtuous acts
P2-Assuming we don’t know what a virtuous act is, or what causes a virtious person, the issue is that we aren’t given a clear explanation as to what these actually mean
C-This means that someone who doesn’t understand virtue isn’t nearer to understanding it and they dont have a role model to follow, the definitiion of virtuous act is an act carried out by a virtuous person which doesnt narrow it down
Ayers verification principle
Empiricist approach to philosophy that aims to disprove moral realism by pointing out the flaws in moral judgements
Claims that a proposition/truth claim is only meaningful if it’s a tautology (true by definition) or verifiable through experience. If a statement cannot be verified via empirical means or it isn’t a tautology, its meaningless
Explain Kants first formulation of the categorical imperative (Contradiction in conception)
Categorial imperative: universal laws that should apply to everyone regardless of their desires. These are unconditional and absolute (eg. You ought to keep promises)
The first formulation of the categorial imperative is used as a test to derive more specific duties: Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction
Acting on a maxim that doesn’t pass this test is morally wrong, and fails if universalising it leads to a contradiction
Eg. Stating that its okay to steal leads to a contradiction in conception as its self contradictory for everyone to follow it
P1-If stealing was ok, you could take whatever you wanted from someone whenever
P2-If you could do this, the concept of ownership wouldn’t exist as everyone would have as much right as the owner
P3-If the concept of ownership doesn’t exist, stealing wouldn’t either as nobody has rights to anything
C-Therefore if its always ok to steal, it isn’t even possible to steal
C2-So “Stealing is ok” leads to a contradiction in conception
Explain Moores open ended argument
Attempts to prove that moral properties cannot be reduced to non moral properties
P1: For all concepts in the place of X: It is X, but is it morally good? is an open question
P2: If so, then no other concept has the same meaning as the concept “morally good”. (This is a
claim about what makes two concepts synonymous)
* P3: If so, then the property of moral goodness is neither identical to nor reducible to any other property
* C: Therefore, the property of moral goodness is neither identical to nor reducible to any other property
Benthams utilitarianism
(12) explain bentham utilitarianism and How experience machine counters
Bentham is a hedonistic utilitarianism (Actions are morally good via the extent they maximise utility
Takes a quantitative approach to utilitarianism, and cares about the quantity of happiness produced as a result of an action
Agrees with the principle of utility
Argues that Humans are naturally motivated to seek pleasure and avoid pain, hedonism is the pursuit of happiness
Pleasure is quantified using Bentham’s utility calculus
Pleasure is quantified using intensity (how strong), duration (how long), fecundity (will it cause further pleasure) , certainty (how likely it is) purity (how free from pain), and extent (how many does it affect)
The amount of happiness produced- the overall pain produced
Not all universal maxims are moral
25 marker for kant
Kant argues that ignoring a perfect duty leads to a contradiction in conception.
the very concept of private property couldn’t exist if stealing was universally permissible.
by tweaking the maxim we can avoid the contradiction and justify stealing.
Instead of maxim being “to steal” we could say to steal from people with 5 letters in their name
this maxim could be universalised without undermining private property
shows that just because a maxim can be universalised, it doesnt make it moral
Clashing/competing duties
25 marker for kant
Kant believes we are creators of our own moral laws and we should never violate them
But what if we are put in a position in where its unavoidable
eg. we have a duty to never lie
what happens where we are in a situation where the only way to keep a promise is to lie
making either choice violates a duty
Aristotles response to Circularity
Aristotle adds additional elements to the explanation
eg. a virtuous person habitaully performs actions that are the result of choice, which bring pleasure and avoid too much or too little of something
he also describes a virtuous person in terms of eudaimonia
Virtue ethics give no clear guidance on how to act
Aristole describes virtues in the middle of two extremes (doctrine of the mean)
it varies depending on situation, isn’t a useful guide on what to do, how are you meant to tell if you’re doing too much or too little
the doc of mean only gives vague descriptions of too much and too little, if you dont know what to do its useless
Aristotle response to virtue no clear guidance
Wasn’t intended to be a guidance on how to act
life is complicated, this is why practical reasoning needs to be developed
