week 9 Flashcards
What is Akan humanism’s theory of value? According to Wiredu, what is sympathetic impartiality, and what role does it play in Akan humanism’s theory of value?
Theory of value: human beings have value: Akan humanism
- sympathetic impartiality is to act in accordance with a moral rule while doing so out of sympathy towards other interests, and duty and respect for the rule. acting out of duty to the value of humans is what has moral worth. humans have value and we have a duty to respect that value and thus respect their wishes.
What two points about value does Wiredu make from the basic claim that human beings have value
- value derives from human interests
- human fellowship is the most important of human needs
We discussed three points that Wiredu makes against a supernaturalistic interpretation of Akan morality. Describe two of these points in detail (response should also mention the relevant example, maxim, or distinction that wiredu makes to motivate that point).
point 1: Empirical facts- moral lessons ought to be grounded in empirical facts about human well-being. These happen in the home, not any religious institution
example: no akan prohibition on pre-marital sex, because there is an understanding that it is important for prospective couples to know each other
point 2: conceptual distinctiveness
- the supreme being’s moral goodness is conceptually distinct from the religious goodness of being a just and benevolent ancestor. The prospect of punishment might occupy people’s minds, but it can’t be the basis of moral obligation.
Example: a thief might worry that the police will stop them from stealing, but it is not the police that make stealing wrong.
Wiredu invokes the crocodile motif in the course of describing Akan humanism. According to Wiredu, what problem is the motif intended to address, and how does the motif purport to address that problem? In your response, you should also mention at least one Akan maxim that Wiredu gives to illustrate the significance of interest convergence.
The crocodile motif is introduced to address the problem of what grounds moral obligation.
- the crocodile motif purports to address the problem by claiming that human beings have a core of common interests, but conflicting interests that precipitate struggles
the aim of morality then is to harmonize waring interests and find some solution to the natural conflict. individuals diverse interests can and do converge. Wiredu illustrates this with an akan maxim that says if you do not allow your neighbor to reach nine you will never reach ten- this illustrates a sympathetic impartial attitude towards the golden rule: treat others how you want to be treated
What problems of industrialization and urbanization does Wiredu consider, and what examples does he give to illustrate these problems?
industrialization and urbanization have significantly changes the Akan moral landscape. industrialization and urbanization have prompted issues of right action and moral motivation.
-Wiredu uses self-reliance and dependance to illustrate the problem of right action, stating that the commercialization of agriculture is causing the ideology of mutual aid to lose some of its hold.
-He uses theft to illustrate the problem of moral motivation- he says that some rich people are known to have come by their assets through debatable techniques of acquisition. The effects of this situation on the young constituted some of the more intractable problems generate by the impact of industrialization on tradition Akan ethic.
Wiredu makes a distinctively Kantian argument about moral imperatives. What is that argument, and what does it suggest that Kantianism and Akan Humanism share?
The Kantian argument asks us to imagine a circumstance in which it is feasible to base human society on the reversal- lying instead of truth-telling. wiredu says that it is not feasible because a world of liars is an intolerable one. So a rule of conduct is not a moral rule unless its non-existence or reversal would bring about the collapse of human community.
it suggests that kantianism and akan humanism both find moral value in the means rather than the end. Kant claims that living ethically requires one to never treat another human being as a means to some greater end- value lies within humans
How does Wiredu conceive of the argument for Moral Relativism in response to Akan humanism.
the relativists objection according to Wiredu:
- If morality is not relative to culture or circumstance then it seems to not depend on anything human
- if morality does not depend on anything human, then it must be either supernaturalistic, or weirdly non-natural
- both supernaturalism and non-naturalism have a sense of infallibility
- infallibility is at odds with open mindedness
- therefore morality is relative to culture or circumstance
What is Akan humanism’s theory of right conduct?
An action is right just insofar as it promotes the well-being of others; an act is wrong to the extent that it fails to enhance the welfare of others
What are two ways that Wiredu’s description of Akan humanism differs from Kantianism?
humanism: human well-being is the ultimate good. personal interest, and the consideration of others’ interests matter. for Kant on the other hand there is no necessary connection between following moral rules and human interest or well-being
rejection of absolutism: there are exceptions to moral rules insofar as those rules fail to harmonize people’s interests and promote well-being
- it is ok to lie, for instance, to someone who wants to kill your family member- Kant does not believe that is the case
What is Wiredu’s two-pronged response to the relativist argument?
- relativism misidentifies morality with a transcendent or infallible point of view: there are empirical facts about human nature that ground rightness and wrongness- no infallible point of view is required
- relativism misidentifies good conduct with moral rightness: some things are matters of custom, not morality
