Quiz 2 Flashcards
Moral realism
assumes correspondence theory of truth
our true statements correspond to an objective reality
reasons to embrace moral realism
the law of the excluded middle: two contradictory statements can’t both be true
people change their mind –> come to recognize the truth whereas before they were deceived
what is the law of the excluded middle?
the law of the excluded middle: two contradictory statements can’t both be true
why was there a shift away from moral realism?
response to Holocaust, attempt to understand evil if you aren’t a moral realist
Arendt– dialectical understanding
Thesis (A) and antithesis (B) are fundamentally opposite, and synthesis (C) leads to reconcilliation
I (A) and them (B) are fundamentally opposite but need to be reconciled into a sense of “we” (C) to create collective identity
to be a thinking self is to be a member of the human community (natural law of human identity is to be rational, thinking self)
If you harm another you are hurting yourself– collective sense of identity– can’t commit genocide
What did Arendt mean by “the banality of evil”
to be evil is to deviate/failure to uphold the thinking self
Andrew Delblanco
how do we account for evil without relying on an outward evil force?
Vascilates between subjective/objective views of evil
historical perspective
we have a hard time talking about evil because of post-modern sensibility
Nihlism– what is it?
lack of realism
nothing is right or wrong
what branch of philosophy did Nietzsche belong to
nihlism
what did nietzsche believe
“god is dead” –> movement away from moral realism
critiqued christian morality
nietzsche’s first treatise
our understanding of morality (put others first) derives from slave revolt --> sees christian morality as a revolt by the underclass against the powerful (those who establish what's right/nobilitu) who previously defined right as power, welath, status (things the upper class had and lower class didn't) how nietzche explains difference between good and evil etumologically good = noble
what is the etymology of good
noble
n’s second treatise
difference between right and wrong, origin of guilt/philologist (philosophy + how language has changed historically)
guild = debt in German
how does guild tit into morality?
Historically– nomadic communitiies
survive by huting
being in the wrong = not doing what you were supposed to do to hold up obligations to community –> not paying debt to community
nomadics valued aggression, mobility, defense, hunting
fail to “pay debt” to community –> banishment
society becomes agrarian, inclusive, larger, aggression becomes a destructive force
larger community –> be in wrong no longer requires banishment but still has to be punished, aggression is now internalized without external outlet, shift to psychological instead of psysical expression, people “in the wrong” beat themselves up emotionally through guilt
how nietzche explains right and wrong
n’s 3rd treatise
ascetic ideal
self deprivation
the maximization of tendency to be realy hard on ourselves
non - cognitivism
form of nihlism
moral judgments/statements can’t be either true or false, purely personal/subjective
moral statements jsut express individual feelings
critics of non-cognitivism
language is multifaceted/has many functions on an individual basis
moral objectivism
there is right and wrong, but truth is based on community understanding
moral subjectivism
there is truth, but it’s true/right/wrong on an individual basis
problems with m objectivism/subjectivism
MO
only way to decide morality is to take an opinion poll– is this good?
you can’t have a debate or dialogue about morals
breakdown in communication
both
no way to resolve conflict if everyone is right
some argue it fosters tolerence but it doesn’t always work out that way
common sense morality
we should not merely not harm others, but help others to the extent that you yourself are not harmed
empathy is fundamental tennent of morality
moral egoism
it’s right/moral to act in your own self interest, self interest is the most important thing
psychological egoism
descriptive statement, theory about human behaviour– humans tend to act out of self interet
“ought implies can”**
derives from psychological egoism
Adam Smith
moral egoism
capitalist philosophy
18th century
wealth of nations, the invisible hand
individual sef interest is key to social well being whereas actively pursuing social interest doesn’t work as well
valorize competition
doesn’t say people can’t be good, just are goo for self-interested reasons
invisible hand
impersonal, individuals don’t understand big picutre but everything works out if they ursue self interest, focus of market
Smith –> invidible hand - god’s hand, benegolent god that wants to maximize human happiness
what does smith assume
all people are equally happy- perfect god is not going to create an imperfect world, but god has made it so we believe we will be happier with more welath, thus we are dissatisfied and strive to make more money, extra capital leads to general human happiness because society has more money
Herbert Spencer
“survival of the fittest” people are going to suffer
wanted to abolish England’s poor laws
let free market dictate how people interact
laissez faire economy is the counterpart to Darwinian idea of adaptation (or not) to (economic) environment
Mill’s speech on Capital punishment
cap punishment is the ideal punishment
values feeling over existence
Mill feels it’s more hunane
recognizes that fear of death is ery prevalent
fear can be used to better society
death is not the worst thing, looks worse than it is, CP is better than it looks, certainly better than life with hard labor
existence is of secondary importance
Gendered nature of abolishing CP
effininancy, inconsistent/weak/illogical/lenient/feminine nature
feminization of britain means lack of strength/willpower to follow through
Men are supposed to be prepared to fight/sacrifice life –> masculine education
Masculine aspect of debate is related to the issue of education
–senese that life is not most important, men should be prepared to sacrifice their lives or kill for higher purposes, protection of other citizens, we have to be “men” about CP
what is the power of punishment
how punishment is perceived is more important than how it actually is
what are criticisms of CP and how does mill refute
CP not effective
-we can’t know, no way to measure crime that didn’t commit
hypocritical thinking
-punishment should fit the crime, suffering when crime is committed, why can’t you impose suffering on someone who imposed suffering on someone else? nature of punishment- we impose suffering on people who impose suffering
irrevocable, can’t un-kill if later proven innocent
-careful to make sure prisoner doesn’t show remorse/can’t live peacefully in society
how does Mill employ intellectual elitism
cultural confidence in thoroughness of British legal system, willing to go the extra mile to make sure not executing wrongly, sophisticated judicial system, not universally moral but moral here because of cultural circumstances
who is a hedonist
Mill, belief that we should maximize pleasure and avoide pain
generally assume people know what is pleasurable/painful
desire fulfillment utilitarianism
generate most good but doesn’t necessarily relate to pleasure, want to know truth even though ignorance is bliss/truth may hurt, happiness is not necessarily equated with pleasure
critique of DFU
doesn’t account for happiness distribution
Equality for its own sake U
always aim for ***
critique of EFIOSU
if everyone’s equal some will be dragged down, those with naturally greater abilities will need to be handicapped
Prioritarianism
the good/happiness allocated to those who are worse off is more important than good allocated to those who are better off
emphasizes quantification
sufficientarianism
posits that there is a threshold fo wellbeing after hwich inequality is acceptable
desert oriented utilitarianism
posits that people should be as happy as they deserve to be
you get what you deserve
act utilitarianism
focused on maximizing happiness with choices/acts in the here and now, very specific
problems with AY
considered too variable, not consistent enough, unrealistic expecataions, too much is required of individuals, quantifying happiness is subjective, too much emphasis on quantification of happiness to decide what will maximize happiness, not enough knowledge about future to know what will be best to calculate everything before acting./dont’ have enough time to decide in a crisis, ignores past obligations/responsibilities, individual differences don’t natter
Rule Utilitarianism
circumvent some AU problems
society is better off if people come up with general rule to accomodate problems
what is happiness? who deserves happiness?
hierarchy of being, person counts for more than animal/inanimate objects
sentience/consciousness - important factor in who should be happy
Mill’s U ch I
complaints about previous thinkers
- no consensus about definition of right/wrong, too little progress in figuring out what is r/w, in coming up with a first principle if r/w
- question science, characteristic of inductive reason, look at details first –> characteristic of philosophy until utilitarianism
mills wants to be __
deductive, general priciple of happiness -> specific rules, argues that utilitarianism offers this
greatet happiness principle
maximize happiness in the wprld
everyones happiness matters equally–> don’t confuse with distribution, all people deserve happiness, but not all kinds of happiness, not all kinds of happiness are equal
*Phillipa Foot, deep happiness
kinds of being in Mills U
swine criticism = misunderstanding of Epicuras
few humans… fullest allowance of beasts pleasure
scale of being, hierarchy of creatures, hierarchy of pleasures
different kinds of specific people and creatures
related to understanding of human dignity, prevents us from choosing lesser pleasures
human dignity…
prevents us from choosing lesser pleasures
human nobility…
we want our happiness and happiness of others, willing to forego some of our own happiness if we believe it will benefit others, prevents choosing selfish pleasure/being self-serving
