Test 2 Flashcards
(40 cards)
Utilitarianism
Type of consequentialist moral theory. The idea that right actions are the ones that result in the most total good/utility.
Describes ‘rightness’ of actions in terms of obligation and ‘goodness’ of actions in terms of value
Defining characteristic is emphasis on impartiality; everyone’s equally entitled to goodness
Utilitarianism: Obligation
1 of 2 components of Utilitarianism
Theory of “rightness” of actions: a moral act is the one that brings about the most net good/utility.
Utilitarianism: Value (what the ‘good’ is)
1 of 2 components of Utilitarianism
“goodness” of actions: a moral act is the one that maximizes hedonism, eudaimonism, or desire satisfaction
Intrinsic Value
1 of 2 kinds of value (goodness) that should be maximized according to in utilitarianism.
Involves intrinsic things (i.e. health or knowledge)
Instrumental Value
1 of 2 kinds of value (goodness), but is DOESN’T need to be maximized according to in utilitarianism.
Involves things (i.e. Money) that enable the attainment/maximization of intrinsic things.
Hedonism (per Bentham utilitarianism)
1 of 3 types of ‘value’ that should be maximized according to utilitarianism
Roughly means pleasure.
Eudaimonism (per Mill utilitarianism)
1 of 3 types of ‘value’ that should be maximized according to utilitarianism
Roughly means happiness
Desire Satisfaction (per contemporary utilitarianism)
1 of 3 types of ‘value’ that should be maximized according to utilitarianism
Roughly involves/includes things that satisfy intrinsic desires*
*these aren’t clearly defined
Utilitarianism: Disutility
1 of 3 ‘self-undermining’ flaws of (Bentham’s) utilitarianism
The idea that efforts to consistently maximize good/utility can actually result in actions that would otherwise be considered immoral (i.e. maximizing spectators’ good/utility by enabling them to watch gladiators kill each other)
Can also result in counterproductive deliberation about the ‘right’ actions to choose.
Utilitarianism: Applicability Problems
1 of 3 ‘self-undermining’ flaws of (Mill’s) utilitarianism
The idea that there can be pluralism about intrinsic values (incommensurability) and conflicting intrinsic values (interpersonal comparisons) which impair prioritization of values
Utilitarianism: Counter-intuitive Consequences
1 of 3 ‘self-undermining’ flaws of (contemporary) utilitarianism
5 of them: puzzle problem, ….
Incommensurability of Values
Flaw of (Mill’s) utilitarianism
The idea that there can be pluralism about intrinsic values which impairs prioritization of values
Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility
Flaw of utilitarianism (especially for people who think desire satisfaction is the most important intrinsic good)
The idea that there can be conflicting desires which impair prioritization of the desires; the theory doesn’t tell you which desires to elevate above other desires.
Arguments on Counter-intuitive Consequences of Utilitarianism
Usually involve examination of the logical implications of applying a particular theory
Conclusions may serve to undermine the theory
Conclusions may be challenged by: discrediting the conclusion or by downplaying the impact of the conclusion
Population Puzzle
1 of 5 examples of counter-intuitive consequences of utilitarianism
The idea that we ought to furiously make babies (because babies help maximize net good/utility) or that we ought to furiously kill babies (because killing babies maximizes the average net good/utility)
Special Obligation
1 of 5 examples of counter-intuitive consequences of utilitarianism
The idea that we ought to marginalize maximization of good/utility for people special to us (e.g. our loved ones) to prioritize maximization of good/utility for the many (e.g. the homeless)
Dismissal of Retributive Justice
1 of 5 examples of counter-intuitive consequences of utilitarianism
The idea that we ought to dismiss retributive justice and inflict punishment on individuals who haven’t actually committed crimes in order to maximize net good/utility
Dismissal of Distributive Justice
1 of 5 examples of counter-intuitive consequences of utilitarianism
The idea that we ought not distribute good/utility equally amongst all people so long as the total net good/utility is achieved
Execessive Demands
1 of 5 examples of counter-intuitive consequences of utilitarianism
The idea that utilitarianism requires great personal sacrifice (e.g. giving your paycheck to charity to maximize net good/utility instead of using it to pay your rent)
Kantianism
Moral theory that defines “good” based on intentions.
Describes ‘morality’ in terms of ‘rationality’ (the God given ability to choose and execute moral actions)
Good Will
Component of Kantian moral theory.
The only unconditional, incorruptible ‘good’.
Acting out of good will means taking ‘right’ actions for the right reasons
Exp. Abstaining from stealing because stealing is wrong.
Acting in Accordance with Duty
Concept from Kantian moral theory.
When you take ‘right’ actions for the wrong reasons (i.e. Abstaining from stealing because you don’t want to be caught stealing)
Acting for the Sake of Duty
Concept from Kantian moral theory.
When you do the ‘right’ actions for the ‘right’ reasons (i.e. Abstaining from stealing because stealing is wrong)
THE Categorical Imperative
The main imperative of Kantian moral theory.
Has 2 parts:
- If a seemingly ‘good’ action is still considered ‘good’ if everybody and their mama were to start doing it, the actions can be appraised as good.
- Using people merely as a means to an end is always ‘bad’
People must be able to consent to being used (Rational Reflection)
