phil a1 summer revision

Question 1

5 pros of Bentham’s utilitarianism

Answer 1

— treats everyone EQUALLY 🟰
— theoretically leads to POSITIVE OUTCOMES 😁
— simple + straightforward ➡️
— can be applied to different societies; is RELATIVE 🌍. FLEXIBLE
— empirical and PRAGMATIC: based on what the world is currently, not what it should be

Question 2

5 weaknesses of Bentham’s utilitarianism

Answer 2

— TYRANNY 👿 OF MAJORITY (doesn’t consider individual liberty/rights)
— problems with CALCULATION ✖️➗➕➖ (subjectivity) (predicting consequences)
— issues around PARTIALITY 😣
— ignores INTENTION 🧐

— NOZICK

Question 3

describe Mill’s utilitarianism

Answer 3

• hedonistic rule utilitarianism
• certain rules generally create more pleasure and less pain, these rules should ALWAYS be followed universally regardless of the individual situation
• HARM PRINCIPLE: always pursue own happiness unless it infringes on others’ ability to pursue happiness
• INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY: people being free to do unconventional things prevents dead dogmas, challenging and refreshing societal rules and status quo
• higher and lower pleasures

Question 4

4 pros of Mill’s utilitarianism

Answer 4

— treats people EQUALLY 🟰
— theoretically leads to POSITIVE OUTCOMES 😁
— solves tyranny of majority
— allows for different forms/qualities of pleasure

Question 5

7 cons of Mill’s utilitarianism

Answer 5

— problems with CALCULATION ➗✖️➖➕ (subjectivity, predicting consequences, what beings to include)
— issues with PARTIALITY
— ignores INTENTION 🧐
— higher and lower distinction may be SNOBBY and unnecessary
— who decides the RULES?
— rulesl might clash 💥

— NOZICK

Question 6

outline Nozick’s argument against hedonism (5)

Answer 6

1. if experiencing as much pleasure as possible is all that matters, we should always do what gives most pleasure
2. plugging into the experience machine gives us the most pleasure
3. if all that matters to us is experiencing the most pleasure, we have no reason not to plug into machine
4. we have reason not to plug into the machine
5. so, experiencing the most pleasure isn’t all that matters to us: we aren’t truly (or simply) hedonists

Question 7

describe Singer’s utilitarianism

Answer 7

• preference act utilitarianism
• “an action contrary to the preference of any being is, unless the preference is outweighed by contrary preferences, wrong”
• concerned with preference (not pleasure) of all conscious beings
  (those who experience pain/pleasure and can anticipate future)
• must take pov of impartial spectator

Question 8

5 pros of Singer’s utilitarianism

Answer 8

— SOLVES NOZICK’s thought experiment
— considers INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS and liberty
— treats all equally 🟰 (animal rights) 🐄 🐷
— theoretically creates POSITIVE OUTCOMES 😁
— simple and straightforward ➡️

Question 9

5 cons of Singer’s utilitarianism

Answer 9

— values animal’s preferences equally to humans??
— doesn’t value non-conscious beings (babies, coma etc) 👶
— prioritises preference over other things (intention, virtue, value of life etc)
— issues with partiality
— certain preferences are antisocial and irrational and we shouldn’t indulge: what should we count?

Question 10

define the categorical imperative

Answer 10

Based on reason alone;

Maxims that always apply and are always morally correct regardless of our feelings/situations etc

Question 11

6 pros of Kant’s ethics

Answer 11

— moral autonomy 💪: only focuses on motives which we can control (others actions don’t impact your morality e.g. Jim and Indians)

— don’t have to rely on unpredictable consequences ❓

— SIMPLE 😌

— RATIONAL: ➕✖️➗➖can’t be blinded by emotion

— UNIVERSAL and can be applied at any time and place (egalitarian)

— HUMAN RIGHTS 🕊 are supported

Question 12

6 cons of Kant ethics

Answer 12

— PROBLEMS with UNIVERSALISING maxims (some universalisable maxims aren’t moral and vice versa)

— some duties CONTRADICT and clash 💥

— CONSEQUENCES do matter!!

— ignores motives beyond goodwill (sympathy, love etc)

— ignores commitments to family/friends: TOO IMPARTIAL

— INFLEXIBLE 📏 : no grey areas allowed

Question 13

what is Philippa Foot’s theory and how does it counter Kant

Answer 13

— morality doesn’t equal rationality. An immoral person can act rationally

— goal of morality is different for everyone

So, concept of categorical imperatives is fundamentally flawed and morality is about achieving hypothetical imperatives

Question 14

what is Aristotle’s virtue ethics

Answer 14

teological theory

arguing that we should focus on human character

and achieving eudaimonia by becoming virtuous over time

rather than focusing on individual actions

Question 15

what is the function argument (7)

Answer 15

1. everything has a function
2. so, humans have a function
3. what makes us human is our rational soul
4. so, to function as humans we must be rational
5. something fulfils its function well (i.e. its good) by having the right virtues / arete
6. so, a good human is one who is virtuous their rational soul
7. so, we reach eudaimonia by being virtuous through our rational soul

Question 16

what is the doctrine of the mean

Answer 16

virtues are the average/mean between two extremes (vices of deficiency and excess)

e.g. cowardice — courage — recklessness
shy ———— modest —- shameless

Question 17

what is phronesis

Answer 17

practical wisdom: a general understanding of good so that the person can think through and act according to what is good

(developed through habituation)

Question 18

what does ari say about moral responsibility?

Answer 18

we should praise/condemn actions depending on if they were done voluntarily/involuntarily

Question 19

what is the lack of guidance criticism of ari’s VE

Answer 19

doesn’t offer a specific practical guide of how to act: too subjective and therefore inapplicable to reality

Question 20

ari’s responses to the problems with virtues arg against his theory?

Answer 20

— conflicts between virtues are impossible (as they aren’t rigid, unbreakable rules): use phronesis to know which virtue to follow

— all virtues link back to 1 of his 12 so the list is essentially exhaustive

— Aristotle would say his list of virtues is correct, even if other cultures disagree (but this is kind of a shit response bc how do we know he’s right and others are wrong)

Question 21

explain the problem of eudaimonia

Answer 21

there is a difference between eudaimonia and moral good: people can lead morally good lives without achieving full human flourishing, happiness and eudaimonia

so, Aristotleian virtue ethics fail to fully explain what morality is

Question 22

ari’s response to the problems with eudaimonia argument against his theory

Answer 22

Aristotle was never trying to answer the question of what a morally good life is.

eudaimonia + virtue ethics is about a good life in GENERAL… being morally good is necessary but not sufficient for eudaimonia

Question 23

what did Mary Anscombe say about ari’s virtue ethics?

Answer 23

• rejected deontology and consequentialism
• acts can’t be moral in themselves, we must consider them in relation to the character of the person committing them
• we need to oil a machine not bc oil itself is ‘good’, but because its good for that machine
• so we need to do certain acts not bc they’re ‘good’, but because they’re good for our character

ALSO

• to have absolute moral rules, we need a rule-giver (God)
• without God, we can’t have moral system of laws

—> so virtue ethics is the only appropriate ethical system