Moral Philosophy Flashcards
What is Kantian Ethics?
Have deontologial/duty/motives
See the importance of reason/ rational beings/ moral law
Involve good will
Categorical Imperative – formulations explained – universalizability, means to end
Maxims
What is evaluation of Kantian ethics?
Accords with the view that moral rules should apply to everyone and the essence of immortality is in making yourself an acception
Accords with the view that morality involves showing respect for people as rational persons
Accords with the view that morality involves obligation (duty) and is not a matter of personal preference
Accords with the view that a moral position is rationally defensible and doesn’t lead to arbitrary results
Accords with the view that an important aspect of moral behaviour is the motive and intention of the action
Provides a mechanism for making moral decisions in a dispassionate way.
Its insistence on ignoring consequences means that in certain circumstances the theory advocates actions that are, from intuitive point of view, clearly wrong
One of the biggest problems in knowing what to do is when there is a conflict of duties and Kantian ethics fails to address this crucial problem
The theory presupposes that it is possible to identify the maxim on which a person acts but in reality it is frequently impossible to identify one’s own motives let alone the motives of others
Because there is no assured way of identifying the correct maxim the theory is open to manipulation by specifying a more convenient maxim
If two people are acting on different maxims only one of which can be universalised the theory will be advocating different good actions for different people and this conflicts with the notion that moral behaviour should be the same for everyone
The theorys emphasis on treating people as rational individuals means that it has little to say about our obligation to non human animals
The theory seems to exclude actions that are not obviously wrong e.g. showrooming
What is the main feature of Kant’s Categorical Imperative?
deontological approach the role of reason duty is the only acceptable motive universalising the maxim using people as ends not means only
Difficulties with applying the categorical imperative?
identifying the maxim
conflicting duties
is duty the only acceptable motive?
consequences are normally thought to be relevant
What is utilitarian ethics?
are teleological/ consequentialist
involves the greatest happiness principle
bentham - hedonic calculus
mill - higher and lower pleasures/competent judges
act and rule utilitarians
application to the situation - Kant
Important thing is to maximise utility
What is the differences between classical and preference Utilitarianism?
according to utilitarianism the moral worth of an action depends entirely upon its consequences.
a key element of utilitarianism is the greatest happiness principle according to which the right action is the action that brings the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people
according to utilitarianism, aggregate happiness is more than the number of people made happy
utilitarianism was developed by the english philosopher Jeremy bentham who came up with the hedonic calculus as a means of working out what was the right course of action in any situation
Bentham believed that all pleasures are of equal value which led to his theory being described as swine ethics because the happiness of a pig is of no greater value than that of a cultured human being
John Stuart Mill disagreed with bentham that all pleasures are equal value but developed a distinction between higher and lower pleasures which gave priority to the pleasures of the mind
More recent forms of utilitarianism (ideal utilitarianism and preference satisfaction utilitarianism) have rejected the hedonic principle because they hold that humans do not in fact value pleasure above all else
Utilitarianism is distinct from other moral theories in using consequences as the basis for morality for example kants moral theory uses the categorical imperative principle to provide a way of acting in any situation regardless of consequences
the GHP is made up of three sub principles the hedonic principle (pleasure is the only thing that matters) the consequentialist principle (actions are to be judged by their consequences) and the equity principle (everyones happiness is of equal value)
The principle of hedonism is one that has been disputed for a number of reasons eg because there are evil pleasures like those of sadists.
this has led to the development of other forms of the theory which still believe in equity and consequences but dispute that the only consequence of value is hedonistic in nature
Singers preference satisfaction utilitarianism, in contrast to hedonistic utilitarianism, argues that you should aim for consequences which satisfy preferences even if these dont directly lead to the greatest pleasure. for example you should carry out mass vaccination programmes which might cause discomfort for many but it is still preferable that they are carried out to avoid a few cases of a very serious disease
G.E. Moore’s ideal utilitarianism claims that there are what he calls prima facie goods and evils which we can know intuitively, eg the appreciation of beautiful objects, or love. Prima facie evils include the appreciation of anything that is ugly.
He claims that the guiding principle of morality should be whether your actions promote there goods and minimise evils.
This approach if true avoids the problem of evil pleasures
What is the evaluation of Utilitarianism
In order for a normative moral theory to provide an adequate account of moral decision-making we would want it to reflect the kinds of choices most people would want to make (ie it should not force us to take course of action which seems intuitively wrong)
To be successful a moral theory has to be practically applicable in real life situations e.g. it has to give clear direction on how to act and not rely on consulting learned experts each time we have to make a decision
The various different variations of utilitarianism have been developed in order to deal with problems, or improve the original theory. for example Ideal utilitarianism was developed as a response to the criticism that utilitarianism valued things like family or art no more highly than things like enjoying being drunk
What are the strengths of hedonistic utilitarianism?
more sophisticated forms can include a distinction between higher pleasures and lower pleasures, and so discriminate between some things better than others even if both cause pleasures
Hedonistic utilitarianism can avoid the accusation of being an animalistic creed because uniquely human pleasures like art or literature might be valued more highly than purely physical pleasures like eating and sleeping
What are the weaknesses of hedonistic utilitarianism?
it appears to offer a simple way of understanding whether something is good or not which seems to reflect what we would normally want: to increase pleasure and avoid pain
anything can be good if it produces enough pleasure eg jackass tv prank
there are some things which most people agree are good which seem to involve something other than pleasure e.g. telling the truth even though it will cause pain
Nozicks experience machine thought experiment which has been widely used to point out a problem with hedonistic utilitarianism - we seem to value authentic pleasures
What are the strengths of Ideal utilitarianism
recognises that the pleasure caused by some acts is not as valuable as the pleasure caused by others, because some pleasures come from following the ideals of aestheticism and friendship and some does not. For example the pleasure a drunk man experiences from breaking crockery is not as valuable as the pleasure the same man gets from watching shakespeare when he’s sober.
recognises what many of us would intuitively accept that a world without beauty or love would not be good even if all the people in it were happy
What are the weaknesses of ideal utilitarianism?
it cannot offer any proof or evidence to support the claim that a world without artistic beauty, friendship or love would be less good than our own.
it is just offered as a claim that most people seem to accept. Therefore there is no secure basis for the claim that these things are more important than hedonistic pleasures
it claims that we can intuitively know what is good and evil however this reliance on intuitionism is a potential problem since whats intuitively obvious to one person is not intuitively obvious to another
What are the strengths of preference satisfactions utilitarianism?
Arguably this theory embodies a more complex human psychology - happiness or pleasure doesnt exhaust the things we want e.g. a good education a healthy body political freedom meaningful relationships etc
recognises that each persons experience of satisfaction is unique therefore explains why different people have different ideas about what is good and bad
actions are good or bad depending on whether they promote the interests of the people involved so it doesnt involve the opinions of unaffected parties only those that matter in the situation
What are the weaknesses of preference satisfaction utilitarianism?
Some people or beings may not be able to express or act on their preferences e.g. animals young children or people with mental illness. In these cases the theory may prioritise the choices or others even if these choices go against the rights of people or beings who cannot express their preferences (e.g. an unborn childs right to life, or the rights of an animal not to be treated cruelly)
What are the strengths of Act utilitarianism?
recognises the importance of human happiness
sees each case as unique to be assessed on merit
simple rule for each situation - promote pleasure/avoid pain
What are the weaknesses of Act utilitarianism?
may involve hurting people - braking a promise
happiness id not equally divided -the individual loses out/ injustice
how can we measure pleasure/pain accurately?
