deck_17097935 Flashcards
(91 cards)
How can we not discover principles of morality
We cannot discover principles of morality by generalizing from specific cases.
What derives correct actions from laws and makes us carry it out.
Our reason derives correct actions from laws, and the will carries out these actions.
What provides a categorial imperative
Morality
Hypothetical imperative
what you ought to do to achieve some end
Practice volleyball
The categorical imperative
Act only according to that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it becomes a universal law (Universal Law Formulation)
No one should make an exception of herself – no one should exempt herself from the rules that everyone has to follow
Categorical imperatives
What you ought to do, regardless of any ends
Do not lie
Consider the maxim: ‘I will cheat in order to do well.’
if it were universal law then no one would use tests to assess people anymore so there would be no way to do well on tests
Contradiction
Fails the test
What is a maxim
A statement of what one is doing and why one is doing it
Examples/
I will study in order to do well on my test
I will cheat in order to do well on my test
I will make an honest promise in order to get a loan
I will make a lying promise in order to get a loan
What are perfect duties
Not to commit suicide
Not to make false promises
Alternative expression of the categorical imperative
Always act such that you use humanity always as an end, and not merely as a means.
What are imperfect duties
To develop one’s talents
To help others when one can
What is the universal law formulation
The Universal Law Formulation is one of the formulations of Kant’s categorical imperative. It states that you should act only according to maxims that you can will to be universal laws, applicable to everyone without exception. Essentially, it means acting in a way that your actions could become a rule for everyone to follow. It’s about fairness and consistency in moral decision-making.
Right thing to do (Mill)
The right thing to do is that which maximizes aggregate happiness.
The right thing to do is given by the categorical imperative.
The right thing to do is given by the rules to which reasonable people would agree.
The right thing to do is what the truly virtuous person would do.
The right thing to do is given by the generalization of our reasoned judgments about concrete cases.
Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory, meaning it judges actions by their outcomes. According to utilitarianism, the goal is to maximize overall happiness or utility. The best action is the one that increases the sum of happiness for the greatest number of people. It’s all about balancing benefits and harms to achieve the greatest good.
Criticism of utilitarianism
Actions are right for the wrong reasons.
Demands too much of moral actors
What are Kans deontological ethics about
Kant’s deontological ethics is all about duty and moral rules. Unlike consequentialist theories, it doesn’t focus on the outcome of actions but rather on the actions themselves and whether they align with universal moral principles. Respecting the value and equality of others means acting according to rules that everyone can follow, no exceptions.
What theories does Nietzcsche criticize
Nietzsche criticizes all theories that attempt to identify morality through careful reasoning. He argues that morality is a socially constructed set of rules designed to serve the interests of specific people. Instead of using reason to determine morality, Nietzsche believes we should search for the origins of these moral rules, revealing the power dynamics and historical contexts behind them.
Mill’s Utilitarianism
Mill: Mill argues that the right thing to do is that which maximizes aggregate happiness.
Responds to objections
What is utilitarianism
Greatest happines principle, happiness, unhappines
Greatest Happiness Principle: actions are right in proportion as they promote happiness, wrong in proportion that they produce unhappiness.
Happiness: pleasure, absence of pain
Unhappiness: pain, absence of pleasure
Happiness is the only thing that is good in itself.
Doctrine worthy of swine
Objection: There is no higher end than pleasure? This critique, often referred to as the “doctrine worthy of swine,” suggests that such a belief devalues human pleasures, equating them to those of animals. Epicurus countered this by arguing that the objection itself underestimates humans and their capacity for higher, intellectual pleasures, as opposed to merely base, physical ones.
Is there a difference in the quality of pleasures according to John Stuart Mill?
Yes, John Stuart Mill made a significant distinction between higher and lower pleasures. He argued that pleasures of the mind, such as intellectual pursuits, artistic appreciation, and moral satisfaction, are of a higher quality than mere physical pleasures, like those derived from food, drink, or sensory indulgence. Mill believed that those who have experienced both types of pleasure would naturally prefer the higher ones, because they are more fulfilling and enriching.
: Whose happiness should be maximized according to utilitarian principles?
Not the agent alone, but the aggregate happiness of all concerned. Laws, social institutions, education, and opinions should be arranged to cultivate an association between one’s own happiness and the good of the whole.
Q: Why should happiness be maximized?
A: Because, in fact, every person’s ultimate goal is to be the standard of morality.
How did mill reply to the objection that utalitarianism is too demanding
Guiding Principle: The principle of utility serves as a guide for determining the moral rightness of actions—promoting the greatest happiness.
Motivation for Action: People can have various personal reasons for their actions, not just the duty to maximize happiness.
Balance: This distinction makes utilitarianism practical by allowing for personal motivations while still guiding actions towards overall happiness.
How did mill reply to the objection “think abotut everyone” in utalitarianism
Reply: Most of the time you just need to think about the particular people involved. Exceptional occasions where you will be required to consider the public more generally.
