Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

U0 Philosophy 237 > Lecture 8 > Flashcards

Lecture 8 Flashcards

1
Q

what are the different types of vegetarianism

A

moral and non-moral

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

what is non-moral vegetarianism

A

to save money, dont like meat, aesthetic reasons

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what are the types of moral vegatarianis

A

humans based

animal based

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

what are the reasons for human based moral vegetarianism

A

redistribution argument
waste argument
argument from effect on character

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

what is redistribution argument

A

takes a lot of food to feed animals, we should use this food to feed humans instead and combat hunger

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what is waste argument

A

meat industry produces lots of waste, so much water and land needed, should use this for humans instead

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

what is argument from effect on character

A

not eating meat is a good way to develop moral character

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what are the subsections of animal based moral vegetarianism

A

the argument from killing: killing is wrong

The argument from pain nd suffering

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

what are the two views of “argument from killing”

A

consequentialist

deontological

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

do singer and rachel agree on the argument from killing

A

no, they have different perspectives;

singer is consequentialist
rachels in deontological

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

do singer and rachels agree on the argument from pain and suffering

A

yes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what are singer’s consequentialist arguments from killing

A

indirect and direct consequences

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

what must we remember about consequentalists

A

for consequentialist; killing isnt always wrong! Killing hitler would kind of be bad but the good would outweigh the bad
so when asking what is wrong with killing animals, have to keep in mind the balancing excersise

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

according to the consequentialist view, in an ideal world where they would not have any pain or suffering can we kill them?

A

that is the whole argument

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

what is meant by indirect consequences

A

indirect because it doesnt actually impact the being itself

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

what are the indirect consequences

A

other animals fear being killed as well– if you kill one pig, the other pigs may have fear that they will be killed too (so it impacts others)

animals form bonds and mourn the deceased– animals form bonds, and when you kill one animal (a baby cow) the mother will be very sad and will be in pain

17
Q

what are the direct consequences

A

dying is painful (but we are considering the ideal world so this doesn’t count)
killing animals deprives the world of future happiness
it thwarts some animals interest in living

18
Q

what is meat by killing animals deprives the world of future happiness

A

suppose your chicken was very happy, killing the chicken deprives the world of happiness
but if your chicken is verysad then you actually stop the world from sadness which would actually be good
but again we assume we live in an ideal world and all your hickens are happy

19
Q

what is meant by it thwarts some animals interest in living

A

aka violates the interest

when you kill something it violates its interest in living

20
Q

taking not account that it “violates its interest in living” we must define the concept of a person; what is a person

A

a person is a rational and self-conscious being
person forms desires for the future
a person has an interest in living

21
Q

what are example of person

A 
some humans 
apes (singer talks about experiment with ape; taught ape signlangiage and when they pointed to the mirror and asked “who is that” the ape responded with “that is Washoe (me)”)
whales and dolphins
some mammals (pigs and cows)
22
Q

what are some non person

A 
infants and fetuses
individuals with severe mental disabilities
individuals in coma
fish 
shrimp 
birds?
23
Q

what is singer’s first conclusions about the argument from killing

A

killing person always entails something wrong (the violation of an interest in living)
when killing a person we have to balance the good and bad consequences

24
Q

what is meant by, when killing a person we have to balance the good and bad consequences

A

when killing pigs for food, we have toe right the pleasure humans get from eating pigs and the violation of the pigs interest in living. since this violation outweighs the pleasure we get, it is not morally permissible to eat pigs

25
Q

can we kill non persons, according to singer

A

since non persons have no interest in living, we still have to answer one objection; that killing animals deprives the world of future happiness– so we use the replaceability argument

26
Q

what is the replaceability argument

A

when you kill non persons without pain, and you breed or create new beings, you do not give any lost. Thus, non persons are replaceable
if you replace non persons, then the world is not deprived of future happiness

27
Q

what is singers second conclusion

A

it is morally permissible to ill non persons for food, if they are replaced and killed without pain

28
Q

what is rachels deontological argument from killing

A

killing some animals for food is wrong because some animals have a right to life

if they have a right to life then killing them is wrong

29
Q

how do we know that an animal has a right to life

A

an animal has a right to life when it has a life

30
Q

what is it to have a life

A

having a life is not the same thing as being alive. being alive is a biological notion. Having a life, on the other hand, is a biographical not in. A being who has a life has a history that he or she can describe in terms of actions, beliefs, relationships, etc

31
Q

when is death evil, according to rachels

A

when it puts an end to a life, not to a biological process

ex: what are some animals that have a life death of a microbe is not evil

32
Q

what are some animal that have a life

A

monkeys, maybe mammals

33
Q

what animals do not have a life

A

shrimp, bugs

U0 Philosophy 237 (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions