Moral Philosophy Flashcards
(14 cards)
Explain Bentham’s utilitarianism
The morally right action is the one that maximises the most utility, which is defined as pleasure (so the theory is hedonistic). Pleasure is, then, the only sensation that is intrinsically valuable. It is a quantitative theory, which means that the morally good action is the one that results in the highest quantity of pleasure. Bentham formed a utility calculus to help us measure which actions would result in the highest quantity, including factors such as intensity and fecundity.
Explain Mill’s utilitarianism
Mill’s utilitarianism also claims that the morally right action is the one that maximises the most overall utility, therefore this is a hedonistic theory. The theory is also qualitative - meaning that Mill focuses on the quality of the pleasure caused rather than the quantity. He does this by distinguishing between higher and lower pleasures, saying that a small amount of higher pleasure will be worth more than any amount of a lower pleasure. For example, the human experience of intelligence will always be worth more than a lower pleasure such as sleeping or eating. He backs this by saying that a relevant judge would always choose the higher pleasure.
Outline Mill’s proof of the greatest happiness principle
The only possible proof for something being visible is that someone can see it. Similarly, the only possible proof for something being desirable is that it is desired. Happiness is desired so happiness is desirable. Happiness is the only thing that is desirable for its own sake as anything else is only desirable because it leads to happiness at some point. Anything that is desirable for its own sake is morally valuable so ought to be maximised. Therefore the right action is the action that maximises the general happiness.
What are the two types of hedonism
Psychological hedonism believes that only pleasure and pain motivates us
Ethical hedonism believes that pleasure is the only thing that is intrinsically morally valuable
What does Kant mean by good will
Having good will is the highest good. It means doing something because it is the right thing to do, not because it will benefit you in some way. You must therefore act out of duty rather than just in accordance with it. If you act with good will, it is valuable regardless of the consequences of your actions.
Describe the difference between hypothetical and categorical imperatives
A hypothetical imperative is a command that you should follow if you want something to happen, and it applies only to you in a specific situation. For example, if you want to get good grades, you ought to study. It has no moral value. A categorical imperative is a command that you ought to follow as a general rule. If it applies to you then it applies to everyone universally. For example, do not steal. It has moral value.
Explain Kant’s (deontological) ethics, including the first and second formulations of the categorical imperative
Kantian ethics is an act based theory as it places moral value on the intention of the action itself rather than the agent. Categorical imperatives are universal rules that you should follow out of duty. These moral duties are discoverable a priori through the use of reason.
The first formulation of the categorical imperative claims that you should only act according to that maxim which you could at the same time will to be universal law. Essentially, you should only act in a way that everyone else also ought to act and it is our moral duty to do so. There are two types of contradiction that would mean that it is our duty to not act on a maxim - this is how we discover the categorical imperatives we should follow. They are a contradiction in conception and a contradiction in willing. A contradiction in conception means that it is not conceivable for it to be universally applied. For example, the maxim ‘steal’. If everyone could steal, nothing would be in anyone’s possession as it could be stolen - so there would be nothing to steal and therefore nobody could steal. The incoherence of this shows that it is our moral duty to not steal. This is a perfect duty - meaning there are no exceptions. It is never morally permissible to steal. A contradiction in willing is when you would not rationally want the maxim to be universally applied as the outcome is not desirable at all. For example, the maxim ‘do not help others in need’ is conceivable as a universal rule, but a person would not be willing for this to be applied to everyone because they would know that it would make their life much more difficult. To not act on this maxim is an imperfect duty, which means that while we ought to not act on it, we still have the freedom to make choices about when and how that intention should be applied (i.e you must decided when and how to help people in need because you cannot help everyone all at the same time).
The second formulation of the categorical imperative claims that you should use humanity at the same time as an end in itself rather than just as a mere means. This is because humans are rational beings so have free will to make their own choices. This gives them absolute value, and something with absolute value should not be used as a mere means to get something else. If a maxim does use someone as a mere means, then it is morally wrong to act on it. It is our perfect duty to not act on any intentions that fail this formulation. This means that for an action to be morally permissible, you must not use someone merely for your own personal goal but also respect their right to choose their own ends. For example, in lying to someone you are taking away their ability to decide their own ends as they cannot make an informed and rational decision if they have been misled. Therefore it is our moral duty to not lie.
What is moral realism
The belief that morality is an objective feature of reality
What is moral cognitivism and non-cognitivism
Cognitivism says that moral statements express beliefs that can be true or false. Non-cognitivism says that moral statements are not capable of being either true or false.
What is moral naturalism
Moral naturalism is a cognitivist and realist theory that says that moral properties exist and can be reduced to natural properties. For example, ‘murder is wrong’ expresses a belief that murder is wrong, where wrong is a natural property. An obvious example of this is utilitarianism, as good and bad can be reduced to pain and pleasure - which are natural properties of the world. Virtue ethics is also an example because moral good can be reduced to using reason, which is a part of human nature.
What is moral non-naturalism and how does Moore’s intuitionism relate
Moral non-naturalism is a cognitivist and realist theory that says that moral properties exist objectively and are non-natural and basic; they cannot be reduced to anything simpler. It is difficult to explain how we acquire knowledge of non-natural properties because they cannot be perceived or measured. However, Moore’s intuitionism says that we gain knowledge of non-natural moral properties through rational intuition, and that the truth or falsehood of a moral judgement is self-evident because of this intuition.
What is emotivism
Emotivism is a non-cognitivist, anti-realist theory that says moral judgements are just expressions of emotions/feelings of approval or disapproval. For example, when someone says ‘it is good to give money to charity’, what they really mean is ‘yay for giving money to charity’. Likewise, what the moral judgement ‘It was wrong of you to steal the money’ really means is just ‘you stole the money’ (perhaps said in a disapproving tone).
What is prescriptivism
Prescriptivism is an anti-realist, non-cognitivist theory. Moral statements express instructions that aim to guide everyone’s behaviour. Therefore the function of moral utterances is to command ways of acting which apply universally. So in saying that ‘murder is wrong’, you are saying ‘do not murder’. Moral statements are not true or false claims.
What is error theory
Error theory is anti-realist but cognitivist. It believes that statements about morality are descriptions and expressions of people’s beliefs so can be true or false. However, they are ultimately false descriptions because moral properties don’t exist. ‘Murder is wrong’ is false, but ‘murder is right’ is also false because the objective moral rule does not exist.
