final Flashcards
The origin of moral precepts, rules, or prescriptions in the virtue tradition
Virtue ethics, the system of ethical belief that sees one’s character and the virtue that character embodies as the determinant of ethical behavior, was studied by both Plato and Aristotle but in different ways. Plato believed in human reason to achieve happiness (eudaimonia) whereas Aristotle believed in a standard of ethics to guide a moral life; by which his precepts were created.
Plato’s conception of justice
Previous philosophers regarded justice as an external element. However, Plato proves that justice resides internally in the human soul, and is the very virtue that makes a person individually and socially good.
Aristotle’s conception of happiness
According to Aristotle, a thing is best understood by first understanding its purpose, or end goal. Since the unique human function is the capacity to reason and the human purpose is to lead a life with purpose, human happiness is therefore living life according to rational principles.
What Natural Law is and how human beings know and are subject to it
Natural law is an unchanging law by which the basis of human conduct can be observed. Because humans have reason and free will, the natural inclination is to achieve the proper end that is best suited to our nature.
The three components of a moral act, according to Thomas Aquinas, and how they count in the evaluation of a moral act
To be considered a moral action, the act must have three components deemed moral: object (the kind of act it is), end (intention, purpose), circumstance (characteristics of the act, external).
How we get the idea of virtue or right action, according to Hume, and what role reason plays in moral action
According to Hume, Reason can never motivate the will, oppose a passion in the direction of the will, nor be the source of our moral notions. Therefore, the distinction between virtue and vice is that of pleasure and pain, or approval and disapproval and right action is not determined by qualities of nature but rather human constitution.
What the basis is for the moral law, according to Kant, and what is necessary and sufficient to make an act morally good
According to Kant, the moral law by which all other laws can be derived is that one should act in such a way to reasonably will that the actions can become universal law; and if it is not possible, the action should be rejected. In other words, an act is not considered morally good unless there is found to be no contradiction.
The Categorical Imperative—both formulations, and its role in Kant’s ethics
A categorical imperative represents an action that is necessarily good in itself without any other end but the action itself. There are two formulations: act as if the maxim of your action will become moral law, and act in a way that humanity is treated as an end but never a means. Therefore, in Kant’s ethics, moral law is a principle that is alone worthy of respect.
Mill’s principle of utility and its role in ethics
Mill’s principle of utility involves defining happiness as the absence of pain. Therefore it can be said that an action can be evaluated according to its contribution to maximizing the satisfaction of the world, subjectively.
Mill’s conception of happiness
According to Mill, pleasure, and therefore the absence of pain, are the only things that are inherently good. In addition, pleasures can be measured qualitatively. This being said, an action is considered good when it contributes to greater happiness and bad when it lessens happiness.
Nietzsche’s conception of morality as a will to power
Nietzsche argues that the driving force in humans is that of the will to power, which is shown in the desire for independence and dominance. Although it can also be realized in mastery over others, he focuses on the psychological insight of morality through self-mastery.
Nietzsche’s two “moralities” and the source of each
The two moralities according to Nietzsche are master and slave and they can both be found mixed in civilization or individuals. The master morality creates value out of its own strength, whereas the slave, or herd mentality act according to what is beneficial to the weak or powerless.
MacIntyre’s description of and explanation for the current state of moral discourse
MacIntyre describes modern day moral arguments as moral discourse because those on opposing side cannot form a rational conclusion judging by the fact that that are using different rational starting points. Instead of resolving moral debates, all that is happening is making statements to each other about approval or disapproval, and trying to disguise these as facts.
Why, according to MacIntyre, the only two choices for ethics are Nietzsche and Aristotle, and why we should choose Aristotle
Similar to the story of the Polynesians and the taboo that could not be completely understood, no modern philosopher is completely correct. MacIntyre says the two most right are Nietzsche and Aristotle because they are both the autonomous moral agent and social expert. However, Aristotle is more right because we must throw out Nietzsche’s argument around the ubermensch, superman, that cannot exist because at some point, everyone needs someone else.
Virtue ethics
Virtue ethics emphasizes the role of one’s character and the virtues that one’s character embodies for determining or evaluating ethical behavior.
