Oral Exam

Question 1

oral exam

what is ethical relativism?

Answer 1

• refers to a view or doctrine that ethical values and beliefs are RELATIVE to the time, place, persons, situations, and societies that hold them.
• it is a theory that holds NO universally valid moral principles.
• does not try to tell us what is right and wrong because it argues that morality depends on cultural or individual perspectives

what is right for some can be wrong for others based on their cultures

Question 2

oral exam

how does ethical relativism differ from cultural relativism? how are they related?

Answer 2

• ethical relativism has no universal or absolute truth and it depends on individual or societal perspective
• cultural relativism focuses on UNDERSTANDING cultural differences without judgement
• both rejects the idea of universal moral standards
• cultural relativism can lead to ethical relativism when applied moral values, suggesting that morality is culture-dependent

it can be a ‘subset’ of cultural relativism focusing on morality

cultural relativism is the broader concept that beliefs, customs, and values are relative to a specific culture and should be understood within that cultural context.

ethical relativism applies this idea specifically to morality, arguing that moral values and ethical standards are not universal but are instead shaped by cultural norms and traditions.

Question 3

oral exam

distinguish cultural relativism from moral subjectivism. Show their interconnection.

Answer 3

• cultural relativism believes that moral values and practices are shaped by CULTURAL context and should be understood within that CULTURE
• moral subjectivism believes that morality is based on
• INDIVIDUAL beliefs, emotions, or personal preferences.
  both reject universal moral truths

Question 4

oral exam

does the fact that cultures differ prove that ethical relativism is true and a valid ethical theory? why or why not?

Answer 4

• no, cultural differences do not prove that ethical relativism is true. while cultures vary in moral beliefs, this does not mean all moral principles are equally valid or no objective moral truth exist
• differences in moral beliefs do not mean objective morality doesn’t exist.
• many cultures agree on basic moral principles.
• just because people disagree doesn’t mean there’s no correct answer.
• if morality were entirely relative, we couldn’t say harmful practices (e.g., slavery) were objectively wrong.

Question 5

oral exam

what is the argument from respect? how can it be used to support the validity of cultural relativity? how can it be refuted?

Answer 5

• since all cultures have their own beliefs, traditions, and moral systems, we should respect them rather than judge them by outside standards
• it promotes tolerance, and encourages people to be open minded
• respect doesn’t mean acceptance; we can respect a culture’s traditions while still criticizing harmful practices (human rights violation)
• weakness: there is no responsibility for a person to respect or tolerate the moral codes of another if they do not value tolerance themselves since that is what they believe in.
• weakness: too many standards as a gesture of respect and tolerance can cause disorder, leaving only the mightiest of standards/cultures at the top.

Question 5

oral exam

explain the psychological argument. give a concrete and specific example. show its weaknesses as an argument for ethical relativism.

Answer 5

• moral truth is relative to one’s own psychological upbringing, nothing more, and nothing less
• weakness: just because people have different moral beliefs does not mean all moral views are equally valid; differences in belief do not prove there is no objective morality, just as scientific disagreement does not negate objective facts.

examples
some cultures; expressing emotions openly (public crying) are seen as natural and acceptance.

other cultures; viewing public display of emotions are seen as a sign of weakness

Question 5

oral exam

what is the conformity argument? point out one criticism against it.

Answer 5

• states that through cultural relativism, it is thought that people would come to be more accepting of their own societal norms.
• criticism: it makes the majority as the only true and legitimate voice of what is moral or not

example: society believes that abortion is immoral, then the majority of society believes that the act is immoral

Question 6

oral exam

expound on the provability argument. criticize it.

Answer 6

• claims that we cannot fully prove what is right or wrong because people always disagree. unlike science, which uses experiments, moral questions have no clear answers.
• Criticism: just because moral truth are hard to prove, doesn’t mean they are impossible to prove

Question 6

oral exam

which among the argument do you consider the weakest? why?

Answer 6

the conformity argument

one of the weakest because it states that just following social norms doesn’t prove that morality is only about fitting in.
people can question and change unfair rules, so morality is more than just copying others

Question 6

oral exam

which do you think, among the arguments that support ethical relativism, is the strongest? why?

Answer 6

the argument from respect

one of the strongest because it promotes understanding and tolerance between cultures
it encourages people to avoid imposing their own moral views on others

Question 6

oral exam

do you honestly think that morality (what is good and what is bad) is relative? why?

Answer 6

morality is partially relative because different cultures and people have different beliefs about right and wrong.

Why Morality Is Relative:
1. cultural differences
2. historical changes
3. moral gray areas

Why Morality Is Not Entirely Relative:
1. universal moral principles
2. moral progress
3. human nature and reason

Question 6

oral exam

If ethics is merely relative and subjective, does it mean that there is no such thing as good and bad or right and wrong?

Answer 6

if ethics is purely relative, then good and bad are just opinions, but this makes it hard to say some actions are truly wrong.

• Morality Becomes Opinion-Based – No universal right or wrong.
• **No Basis for Moral Criticism **– We couldn’t condemn harmful practices objectively.
• Moral Progress Is Impossible – Changes in society wouldn’t be true improvements.

Question 6

oral exam

what are the practical implications if we accept that morality is just relative?

Answer 6

entirely relative, the consequences include:
1. No Universal Standards – Right and wrong depend on culture or opinion.
2. No Moral Criticism – Harmful practices couldn’t be condemned objectively
3. Arbitrary Justice – Laws and ethics would vary with no universal fairness.
4. No Moral Progress – Changes in society wouldn’t be true improvements.
5. Moral Uncertainty – People may struggle to determine right from wrong.

accepting complete moral relativism can lead to moral paralysis, where no action can be judged as truly right or wrong. while cultural differences in morality exist, the need for universal human rights and justice suggests that some moral principles should be objective.

Question 7

oral exam

how can we really determine whether there is really such a thing as absolute and universal morality?

How can we tell if there is an absolute moral truth?

Answer 7

we can find universal morality by seeing if some moral rules, like not harming other, apply to all people everywhere.
1. **identify moral universals **– some values (e.g., prohibitions against murder) exist across cultures.
2. use rational analysis – ethical theories argue morality is based on reason and human nature.
3. **test for moral progress **– recognizing past moral wrongs suggests objective moral truths.
4. consider practical consequences – pure relativism could justify harmful actions.
5. **study human nature **– moral instincts like empathy appear to be biologically ingrained.

morality may not be entirely relative if we find common values across cultures, logical reasons for ethics, and evidence of moral progress. While culture influences some morals, certain core principles may be universal.

Question 8

oral exam

give a specific and particular example of ethical relativism.

Answer 8

an example of ethical relativism is attitudes toward arranged marriages, polygamy, or divorce

some cultures accept these, some are even seen as tradition, while some do not accept it and consider it unethical, sparking controversy

Question 8

oral exam

how does ethical relativism pose a major threat to the study of ethics?

Answer 8

it means that there is no universal moral truth and there is no right or wrong, therefore a certain standard to what right or wrong is cannot be established by ethics.

Question 8

oral exam

“what is natural is always good.” do you agree? why or why not?

Answer 8

According to natural law, yes and no, as it depends on reason and how actions contributes to human well-being and purpose. good is what we follow nature
as sometimes it can also lead to harm

Not all natural is good unless they align with reason & moral purpose

example, natural disasters are natural and serve its purpose, but they bring harm to humans and the environment, which is not necessarily good.

Question 8

oral exam

how did natural law theory originate?

Answer 8

natural law theory originated from [the earliest stoics], then aristotle’s concept of natural order, developed by cicero, and later systematized by st. thomas aquinas in christian theology

Question 8

oral exam

what is the meaning of “law” in natural law theory?

Answer 8

in natural law theory, “law” refers to universal moral principles inherent in human nature, discoverable through reason/purpose, guiding what is right and wrong

Question 9

oral exam

what are the characteristics of natural law? how does this natural law differ from other kinds of law?

Answer 9

• natural law is objective, universal, and absolute morality.
• it differs from scientific law which explain how nature works, and divine law, which comes from the religion.

Question 9

oral exam

how do we know what is good and bad in natural law thinking?

Answer 9

• by using reason/purpose to understand human nature
  According to Aquinas:
• good actions fulfill our purpose as humans, like living peacefully
• bad actions go against this purpose, like harming others

Natural law determines right and wrong through reason by understanding human nature and its purpose (telos).

Question 9

oral exam

how does st. thomas incorporates aristotle’s idea in his interpretation of natural law? what particular dimension has st. thomas added in his own interpretation?

Answer 9

• st. thomas used aristotle’s idea that everything has a purpose
• he added that this law comes from God and leads people to Him.

Question 9

oral exam

in what sense is morality based on “nature”?

Answer 9

• in a sense that it comes from human nature itself. people can understand what is right and wrong.
• also, it helps to fulfill our purpose, such as living with reason
• According to Aristotelian’s interpretation of natural law, morality can be found in nature based on its purpose. if it serves its purpose, then it is moral.

Question 9

oral exam

what is the role of reason in natural law theory?

Answer 9

• reason/purpose allowing people to recognize what is right and wrong based on human nature.
• natural law is unchangeable and universal
• human nature is lower nature we shared with animals

Question 9

# oral exam what is the basis of calling something “natural”?

Answer 9

* if it aligns with human nature or helps fulfill its purpose such as actions that support reason, life, and moral order

Question 9

# oral exam in what way that our basic human inclinations tell us what we ought to do and not to do?

Answer 9

* basic human inclinations guides us by pointing what is naturally good for us. * we naturally seek to protect our lives, so we seek food, safety, and health

Question 10

# oral exam are human inclinations universal? why or why not?

Answer 10

yes, because it comes from our shared human nature. people seek self-preservation, which is “a natural right”; the right to live and the right to survive

Question 11

# oral exam what do you think is the greatest argument in favor of natural law theory?

Answer 11

universality: it applies to all people because based on human nature and reason, making moral principles objective and unchanging

Question 12

# oral exam what are the objections to natural law theory?

Answer 12

* is-ought problem just because something is natural doesn’t mean it is morally right * cultural differences challenge the idea of universal moral laws * human reason is limited which leads to disagreement * evolutionary perspective as human nature changes over time * religious bias it may not be accepted by by non-religious individuals

Question 13

# oral exam What is aristotle's 4 basic principles about natural law

Answer 13

1. everything in nature has a purpose 2. everything in nature has an essential nature, or certain features that constitute its defining features 3. everything in nature has its proper good 4. something’s natural purpose, it’s essential nature and it’s goodness are intimately related

Question 14

# oral exam What is the thomistic influence on natural law (law as defined by st. thomas)

Answer 14

* defined as an ordinance of reason for the common good, promulgated by a community-oriented authority * a law is an ordinance, a command or directive from a legitimate authority, binding upon subjects to obey

Question 14

# oral exam how does evolutionary theory pose a challenge to natural law thinking?

Answer 14

* evolutionary challenge natural law by showing that human nature changes over time * making moral principles flexible rather than absolute and unchanging

Question 14

# oral exam what are the qualifications of the principle of double effect?

Answer 14

1. the action intended, in and of itself must be good or at least morally indifferent or neutral 2. the evil effect must not be directly intended but morally allowed only as a regrettable side issue/effect 3. the evil effect must not be the means by which the good effect is achieved 4. the good effect must outweigh the evil effect or at least proportional

Question 14

# oral exam what is the principle of inviolability to life?

Answer 14

* the principle of the inviolability of human life is rooted in religious belief that life is of infinite value and sacred * this principle applies to every human life, including the unborn fetus, and is inherently incalculable or immeasurable * the principle of life's infinite value also gives every life equal worth and dignity, regardless of its living conditions

Question 15

# oral exam what is the principle of double effect?

Answer 15

* when an act has both good and bad/positive and negative/desirable and undesirable consequences (double effect consequences) * natural law theorists recognize complex situations where morality cannot be easily labeled as good or bad

Question 15

# oral exam how would you defend natural law theory from the various criticisms forward against it?

Answer 15

natural law is based on universal human purpose, objective moral truths, and reason, despite cultural differences, evolution and religious beliefs. It is obligatory, universal, has consequences, recognizable, and unchangeable or immutable

Question 15

# oral exam critique utilitarianism from the perspective of natural law.

Answer 15

* The premise of utilitarianism that values the end and the consequences rather than the means battles with reason and the objective moral truth that natural law promotes * Under utilitarianism, certain immoral actions deemed totally wrong under natural law can be right if it brings the most pleasure

Question 16

# oral exam critique ethical relativism using natural law.

Answer 16

the natural law argument is rooted in human nature along with reason where there is one objective morality. Although there are different moral codes across different cultures, certain cultural practices, though accepted within specific societies, may violate fundamental human rights and dignity. | basahin ko pa ulit ty

Question 16

# oral exam explain the principle of stewardship related to God.

Answer 16

* The principle of stewardship comes from a religious belief that all life comes from God, implying that no other individual can claim what God owns and therefore have no authority to do harm with it. * We humans are only given the power to take good care of what God owns ## Footnote actions like suicide, euthanasia, abortion, and such are morallyu wrong under natural law supported by this principle

Question 16

# oral exam explain briefly the various characteristics of natural law.

Answer 16

1. Universal & Objective – Applies to everyone, regardless of culture or beliefs. 2. Based on Reason – Discovered through human reasoning, not just religion or society. 3. Purpose-Driven (Teleological) – Everything has a natural purpose or goal. 4. Unchanging & Eternal – Moral truths remain constant over time. 5. Rooted in Human Nature – Morality is based on natural human inclinations. 6. Moral Absolutism – Some actions are always right or wrong. 7. Hierarchy of Laws – Seen as superior to human-made laws, often linked to divine law.

Question 16

# oral exam what’s wrong with natural law’s conception of the idea of nature?

Answer 16

* Although to some extent, human behavior has regularity/predictable or "according to nature," this does not mean that humans are morally bound to behave all the same * natural law is vague in terms of what we make out of it * Evolution challenges the idea of fixed natural purposes (e.g., sex isn’t only for reproduction). * Morality is shaped by culture and reason, not just nature (e.g., slavery was once "natural" but is now seen as wrong).

Question 16

# oral exam explain the principle of totality and show how this principle can be abused.

Answer 16

* The Principle of Totality states that a person can modify or remove body parts if it benefits their overall well-being. * Proper use: Amputation to Save a Life – Removing an infected limb to protect the person’s health. * It can be abused by: 1. Forced Medical Procedures 2. Justifying forced sterilization for the "greater good." 3. Forcing someone to undergo a vasectomy 4. Extreme Body Modifications 5. Risky cosmetic surgeries that don’t truly improve well-being. 6. Euthanasia & Organ Harvesting Using it to justify removing organs from a patient in a coma (not dead, and has not consented; against their will)

Question 16

# oral exam explain the concept of teleology in natural law and how could this be a guide in our action.

Answer 16

Teleology in Natural Law means everything has a natural **purpose** (telos), and moral actions should align with that purpose. * Moral actions fulfill natural purposes (e.g., sex is for procreation, so contraception may be seen as wrong). * Humans should act according to their nature (e.g., lying is wrong because we naturally seek truth). * Laws should reflect human nature (e.g., murder is wrong because life should be preserved).

Question 17

# oral exam critique the natural law’s view regarding same sex marriage.

Answer 17

* The natural law believes that sex is moral only when there is a baby made. One criticism is that there are also instances where heterosexual couples cannot reproduce, specifically elderly couples and a couple wherein one partner is infertile but they are still allowed to marry. If their relationships are valid, why not same-sex unions? * Marriage is not just about having children—it also provides love, companionship, and commitment. Same-sex couples fulfill these purposes just as heterosexual couples do. * Natural Law assumes that human nature is fixed and universal, but history and psychology show that sexual orientation is a natural variation in humans, not a disorder.

Question 18

# oral exam a situation wherein the pregnant mother and baby is in danger. who to kill?

Answer 18

* such as in the case where a mother giving birth and the baby’s are both of risk because of a delicate pregnancy/problems/complications both are equal; infinite/proportional (principle of inviolability of life) * the primary intention is to save the mother’s life, not to kill the fetus; killing the fetus is just the side effect of the intention (principle of forfeiture) * there will be a bad effect on both situations so choosing the less evil (principle of double effect) ## Footnote * it is wrong to say to kill the fetus because it’s less value * you take a life to save a life * the baby’s life is subjectively innocent, but is objectively an aggressor, just the same

Question 19

# oral exam What are the attributes to natural law?

Answer 19

* obligatory: natural law is obligatory, imposing a moral obligation on humans to follow it for ultimate happiness. It declares moral duty and authority * universal: natural law applies to all people, regardless of cultural, religious, political, or ethnic difference * proper sanctions: natural law has its own penalties for non-compliance * knowable or recognizable: natural law is open to all rational beings, allowing them to discover its requirements * immutable or unchangeable: the author of the natural law of God, whose divine decrees originate from His unchanging and immutable nature, ensures the natural law remains unchanged, unlike human or civil laws

Question 20

# oral exam What is the principle of forfeiture?

Answer 20

* life can only be violated (in a way) if threatened or put in extreme danger * in situations where a person's life is threatened by an aggressor, the principle of forfeiture can be invoked as an act of self-defense * natural law thinkers argue that even if the assailant has forfeited their innocence, it is morally justified to kill them

Question 21

# oral exam what is the principle of totality?

Answer 21

* the principle of totality in biomedical discussions states that a part of the human body exists for the good of the whole * morally, this can only be done if the general well-being of the whole body requires it (only applies to defective organs that pose danger to a human being) * the body cannot be made into a commodity/organs cannot be taken out because of aesthetic purposes

Question 22

# oral exam Is it morally justified to go to war?

Answer 22

The Just War Theory justifies war if it meets specific conditions. A country like the Philippines can defend itself if attacked unjustly, but it must be declared by lawful authority, for a just cause, and a last resort after peaceful solutions. War should aim for peace and justice, with a reasonable chance of success and the right means used. Responses should be proportional, focused on defense, and war should be avoided if possible due to its devastating consequences.

Question 23

# oral exam Explain the principle of utility in utilitarianism

Answer 23

* it is stated that an action is morally right if it produces greatest happiness or pleasure for the most people * it measures morality based on the usefulness of an action * It is a consequentialist principle, meaning that actions are judged solely based on their outcomes. Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, key utilitarian thinkers, argued that good actions maximize overall well-being, while bad actions increase suffering or pain. ## Footnote For example, if the government has to pick between building a stadium and a hospital, they have to pick the hospital based on the concept of utilitarianism, since it will result in the well-being of the city.

Question 24

# oral exam Explain one weakness of utilitarianism.

Answer 24

* Uncertainty of Consequences – It is difficult to predict the exact outcomes of our actions, making utilitarian decision-making unreliable. * Impracticality – We lack the time and ability to constantly calculate the pleasure or pain of every action, making utilitarianism unrealistic in practice.

Question 25

# oral exam What does it mean to say that “there’s no right or wrong; good or bad” in utilitarianism?

Answer 25

* in utilitarianism, the judgement of right and wrong is based on the utility of the action or the outcome * utility is based on perception * actions aren’t good or bad by themselves—it depends on what happens because of them. * morality is based on the consequences entailed

Question 26

# oral exam Explain the concept of theology in natural law and how this can be a guide in our action.

Answer 26

* Theology in Natural Law refers to the idea that moral principles are grounded in God’s divine order and purpose for creation. In natural law theory, especially as developed by St. Thomas Aquinas, morality is based on human nature, reason, and God’s eternal law. This means that moral laws are not just human-made rules but are part of a greater divine plan. * Natural law teaches humans to act in alignment with their natural purpose, using reason to determine morality. It provides objective moral standards applicable to all, regardless of culture or beliefs, and emphasizes human dignity and justice, guiding laws and social policies. * Natural law, therefore, connects morality with God’s purpose, ensuring that human actions align with divine will. ## Footnote In short, theology in natural law sees morality as rooted in divine wisdom and helps guide human actions toward fulfilling their natural purpose in accordance with God's plan.

Question 27

# oral exam How is the principle of utility evident in the way society is being run? How would you describe a utilitarian society?

Answer 27

* The Principle of Utility guides society by focusing on actions that maximize happiness and reduce suffering for the majority. * Laws & Policies – Welfare programs help the most people. * Healthcare – Universal healthcare benefits society’s well-being. * Economy – Raising the minimum wage improves overall prosperity. * Justice – Punishments focus on rehabilitation over retribution. * Environment – Laws reduce long-term harm (e.g., cutting carbon emissions). ## Footnote Benefits: Prioritize the greatest good for the greatest number. Adapt policies based on practical benefits. Sometimes sacrifice individual interests for overall well-being. criticism: Minority rights could be ignored. Difficult to measure happiness. Could justify harming a few for the majority’s benefit

Question 28

# oral exam In what particular sense can we say utilitarianism is relativistic in its view of morality?

Answer 28

* Utilitarianism is relativistic in the sense that it does not follow fixed or absolute moral rules. Instead, it says that what is right or wrong depends on the situation and the consequences of an action. * An action is morally right if it leads to the greatest happiness for the greatest number—even if that action might normally be seen as wrong (like lying or stealing). * Because right and wrong are judged based on outcomes, not fixed standards—what is good in one case might be bad in another. This makes utilitarianism a form of moral relativism based on consequences.

Question 29

# oral exam Evaluate natural law using the lens of utilitarianism.

Answer 29

Natural law believes in absolute moral rules based on human nature and divine purpose, while utilitarianism focuses on actions that create the most happiness. * Too Rigid – Natural law says some actions (e.g., lying) are always wrong, but utilitarianism argues rules should change based on what brings the most good. * Ignores Consequences – Natural law judges actions by their nature, while utilitarianism believes what matters is the outcome. * Different Focus on the Common Good – Natural law protects human dignity, but utilitarianism aims to maximize overall happiness, even if some people suffer. (more on the means rather than the happiness of the people and the outcome) * Religious Basis – Natural law is often tied to religion, while utilitarianism is secular and based on logic and results.

Question 30

# oral exam Why is it said that one of the weaknesses of utilitarianism is that it requires too much from people?

Answer 30

* One weakness of utilitarianism is that it demands too much from people because it expects individuals to always act in a way that maximizes overall happiness, even at great personal cost. * This means people must constantly calculate the consequences of their actions, which can be impractical in real-life situations. It also implies that individuals should sacrifice their own interests, time, or resources for the greater good, even when it may be unreasonable or burdensome. ## Footnote For example, if donating most of your income to charity would maximize happiness, utilitarianism suggests you are morally obligated to do so, which can be an extreme and unrealistic expectation.

Question 31

# oral exam Compare Aristotle’s view with that of St. Thomas in their understanding of natural law.

Answer 31

* both differ in their approach * Aristotle viewed natural law as a rational guide for achieving virtue and the "good life" (eudaimonia), emphasizing that moral laws come from human nature and practical wisdom. In contrast, * Aquinas built on Aristotle’s ideas but integrated them with Christian theology, arguing that natural law is part of God's eternal law and must be followed to fulfill a divine purpose. * While Aristotle's view was more philosophical and flexible, Aquinas saw moral laws as absolute and God-given. * Ultimately, Aquinas Christianized Aristotle’s natural law theory, making it foundational to Catholic moral teachings.

Question 32

# oral exam What’s wrong with the utilitarianism principle of utility in the context of social relationships?

Answer 32

* The principle of utility in utilitarianism, which focuses on maximizing overall happiness, can be problematic in social relationships because it often prioritizes the greater good over individual rights and personal commitments. * This can lead to moral dilemmas where close relationships, such as friendships and family bonds, are sacrificed if doing so would increase overall happiness. * Additionally, utilitarianism’s focus on consequences rather than intentions can devalue important moral virtues like honesty, love, and personal integrity, which are essential for meaningful social relationships. ## Footnote For example, a strict utilitarian might choose to betray a friend if it benefits a larger group, undermining trust and loyalty.

Question 33

# oral exam What makes utilitarianism both a consequentialist and hedonistic theory?

Answer 33

* Utilitarianism is both a consequentialist and hedonistic theory because it evaluates actions based on their outcomes (consequentialism) and prioritizes pleasure or happiness as the ultimate goal (hedonism). * As a consequentialist theory, utilitarianism holds that the morality of an action is determined by its consequences—specifically, whether it maximizes overall happiness or minimizes suffering. * As a hedonistic theory, it assumes that pleasure and happiness are the highest goods, meaning that moral actions are those that increase pleasure and reduce pain. This combination makes utilitarianism a** results-focused ethical approach** centered on the well-being of individuals and society.

Question 35

# oral exam what makes utilitarianism a consequentialist theory of morality?

Answer 35

* because it judges actions based on their results * actions are good if it brings good outcomes and bad if it causes harm

Question 36

# oral exam why is utilitarianism considered a hedonistic philosophy?

Answer 36

* because it see happiness/contentment and pleasure as the highest good * that the right action is the one that brings the most pleasure to the most people * whether it generates pleasure, judge on favor which action generates the most pleasure ## Footnote hedonism values pleasure and the importance of attaining the most pleasure

Question 37

# oral exam what is the principle of utility?

Answer 37

* coined by Jeremy Bentham * it is stated that an action is morally right if it produces greatest happiness or pleasure for the most people * it measures morality based on the usefulness of an action * the objective moral standard is the decision or the moral choice that brings the most pleasure and avoids the most pain among the parties that interest it

Question 38

# oral exam what is bentham’s basic assumption regarding human nature?

Answer 38

* he believed that all human actions are motivated by the desire for pleasure and avoidance of pain * morality aims to maximize happiness and minimize suffering for the greatest number of people

Question 39

# oral exam (but my own question) How does utilitarianism become absolutist?

Answer 39

* they believe in one objective morality, which is utility * an action is morally right if it can be utilized to serve a function/to achieve a goal that mean good and beneficial consequences

Question 40

# oral exam how does bentham ground morality scientifically?

Answer 40

* using hedonic calculus, a system for measuring pleasure and pain * this approach makes ethics systematic and objective, like science * quantifies possible choices using factors like intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity,a nd extend, to make a choice that is the best of everyone's interests

Question 41

# oral exam how does mill’s utilitarianism differ with that of bentham’s? which do you think is better?

Answer 41

* bentham focuses on quantifying pleasure (all pleasures are equal) * mill emphasizes quality of pleasure, not just quantity * mill’s view is better because it values higher intellectual and moral pleasure over basic physical ones

Question 42

# oral exam how does mill characterize the “higher” pleasure? Do you agree with him or not?

Answer 42

* mill characterized high pleasure as intellectual, moral, and aesthetic enjoyments (learning, creativity, and virtue) * I agree with him because higher pleasure contributes a long-time benefit, especially with personal fulfillment and growth

Question 43

# oral exam “a socrates dissatisfied is better than a fool satisfied. a human being dissatisfied is better than a pig satisfied.” explain.

Answer 43

* fool/pig’s happiness usually stems from ignorance and only knows satisfaction and nothing beyond that * on the other hand, a human is able to know beyond satisfaction, thus experiencing more in life * this quote means that intellectual and moral growth are more valuable than simple pleasures * it is better to be wise person facing challenges than someone ignorant but easily satisfied

Question 44

# oral exam do you agree with the utilitarian view that the consequences of an action is the only thing that matters in assessing its moral worth?

Answer 44

* no, while consequences are important, intention and moral principles behind an action also matter * some actions, like lying, may lead to good outcomes but still morally wrong.

Question 45

# oral exam do you think that pleasure and happiness is the supreme goal of life? why or why not?

Answer 45

* not necessarily, because virtue, personal growth and **fulfilling responsibilities also matter** * happiness is important, but making it the only goal might overlook deeper aspects of life, such as purpose, personal growth, and moral responsibility. a meaningful life may involve both joy and struggle, rather than just seeking pleasure. * simply chasing pleasures can lead to **selfish choices,** while a meaningful life includes challenges and purpose

Question 46

# oral exam are bodily pleasures inferior to intellectual pleasures? why or why not?

Answer 46

* yes, because they are temporary and based on physical sensations, while intellectual pleasures provide deeper and long-lasting fulfillment

Question 47

# oral exam do you think mill is correct in saying that pleasures vary in quality and not just quantity? why or why not?

Answer 47

* Yes, mill is correct because some pleasures, like intellectual and moral fulfillment, provides deeper and more lasting satisfaction than basic physical pleasures

Question 48

# oral exam do you think bentham’s ethics is egoistic? why or why not?

Answer 48

* no, because it focuses on the greatest happiness for the greatest number, not just personal benefit * utilitarianism considers the well-being of everyone affected by an action, making it universal rather than selfish moral theory

Question 49

# oral exam is utilitarianism ethics anti-christian? why or why not?

Answer 49

* not necessarily anti-christian, but differs from christian ethics * both emphasizes promoting well-being, but christianity values absolute moral values (do not kill), while utilitarianism focuses only on outcomes