Professor: Dr. Nancy Stanlick
Click here for her website, or click here to email her
Sorry, I missed this class. At least it was only the first day, so I did not miss that much
Virtue Theory: A general trend in ethics in which the focus is on the character of the person. Both on developing good character and an examination of what constitutes character. Community-based ethics. Happiness (the good life) is the ultimate goal of human beings. Plato, Aristotle, G.E.M. Anscombe, Alasdir Macintyre.
Kantian Deontology: The view that the right is prior to the good. For the Kantian, the morality of an action is not determined by its consequences, but instead by the principle or maxim on which the action is based. Duty is the ultimate consideration of the morality of an action.
Utilitarianism: The "Greatest Happiness" moral theory. The Utilitarian holds that an action is "right" in proportion as it tends to promote happiness, "wrong" as it tends to promote the reverse of happiness. The ultimate goal is Happiness - where happiness is understood as pleasure and avoidavnce of pain, and unhappiness is pain and the privation of pleasure.
Contractarian Ethics: Very limited (minimalist) view of morality in which one holds the position that morality exists as a matter of agreement. Thomas Hobbes held this position, and many others (even in present time), hold some variation of it.
Egoism: Note the distinction between psychological egoism and ethical egoism.
Rights-Based Ethics: Also - minimalist - a good early view of this is in John Locke's second trestise of government in which he lists the ultimate law of nature which requires us essentially to preserve our own lives, and when that has been achieved, our moral obligation with respect to others is not to interfere in their lives, liberties, or property.
Philosophy is the foundation of all other sciences.
Doing something strickly for yourself, you are not morally right.
Plato's Euthyphro:
Euthyphro: Accusations - corruption of youth, atheism. Euthyphro is accusing his father of the murder of a slave. -Gods. Socrates is "a maker of gods, and . . . (he) creates new gods while not believing in the old gods." Euthyphro claims that he is doing a pious act by prosecuting his father. However, Socrates claims that this may be an impious thing. (Euthyphro is supposed to be an expert in such matters.)
Virtue Theory in ancient context
Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, Epictetus, Aquinas
The point of this little excersie was to prove that you shouldn't subscribe to a system if you don't even know what the system is. We couldn't even think of all the Commandments, but yet most of us subscribe to it.
Why? What.
Knowing - The origin of a thing
Aristotle wrote the Doctrine of the four causes:
Euthyphro:
Gods Commandments
Does God command "X" because it is good? or Is "X" good because God commands it?
Good then God then commandment
Omnibenevolent = good
Omnipotent = powerful
Omniscent = knows
God does all things for a good reason.
Reason - God -commandment
God does things that are good and rational and they become good and rational because God commanded them.
Arbitrarily - without reason.
Is this a Circular argument?
Circular Argument = Offers no external argument at all. Self contained.
I run everything for the best.
The rules I create are designed to run everything.
Therefore, the rules I create run everything for the best.
The Teleological Argument for God's existance
The argument from design
The Natural as a concept in virtue ethics. Virtue - traits of character - being - to be the best person that you can be.
Virtue ethics provides the basis for virtue.
Virtue Theory: character, consequences of actions.
Teleological: consequence based, the consequences of
actions determine their moral worth.
Should you concern yourself with why people do what they do?
Or, should you just focus on the result of their action and not the
why?
Community, Character, and Consequences characterize Virtue Ethics.
Virtue theorists seem to have some sort of goal in mind. Goal = Teleology = Human good = Happiness.
Aristotle's view: The ultimate good is what everybody seeks and the ultimate goal = happiness. How do you know that happiness is the ultimate good?
Happiness is the goal of human life.
What is true happiness?
Human beings are by nature, social or political animals.
The good of the many includes the consideration of the individual.
Aristotle: "Ethics subject matter is human beings and what is more unreliable than that?"
Being: Metaphysics = the study of nature of being, reality
Plato: Extra physical existence = ultimate reality
Good things are good because they participate in goodness.
Plato: There is a realm of things that are perfect.
- Beauty itself can never be ugly.
- But all beautiful things can be made ugly.
- So there must be something that is perfectly ugly.
- But being perfect is good.
- And good cannot be ugly.
- So, can something be ugly?
Plotinus: Evil is like the hole in your donut. Evil is the lack of good.
Being a good person is not something that you do. Being a good person is who you are.
1. What is Justice?
Paying one's debts
too narrow; exception
Giving everyone his due
vague
Benefiting friends; harming enemies
If justice is a virtue and a virtue is an excellence, and an excellence is good, how can HARM be a good thing?
Whatever is in the interest of the stronger
What is the function of a thing? What is the object of an art? Can the art of ruling have as its function
(or object) the interest of the artist, or must it be the improvement of the art or the improvement or benefit
of the subject of the art?
The function of a political leader is to rule well.
2. Socrates' view of Justice
A harmony of the elements of the state and the individual soul
Thrasymachus and Glaucon have described justice such that it seems foreign and external to the individual.
Socrates' position is much more complete than this....
Gyges' Ring
The Luxurious State - from the basics to a completely functional social arrangement
Specialization is necessary:
Rulers Wise (Wisdom) Rational Philosopher Kings
Protectors Courage (Bravery) Spirited Auxiliaries
Producers Temperance Appetitive Artisans
When each group performs its appropriate function, when all "mind their own business," the state will function properly.
Now see the same distinction in the individual soul:
Rational Element Spirited Element Appetitive Element
Wisdom Courage Temperance
JUSTICE is the result
These are the four cardinal virtues: wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice
Eudaimonia: Happiness
Eu = Good
daimon = demon/soul
ia = condition of
condition of a good soul = happiness
- Not a fleating temporary goal, but a good life in a good society
- Function of a human being = focussed on what we are best at
That's it for notes.
Epicureanism
Epicureanism is a version of VIRTUE ETHICS in which the good life is stressed and the development
of good human character is essential.
Epicurus, like other virtue theorists, held the position that what we seek is the good, and in
particular the good life. But unlike someone who might claim that the good life is the seeking
and attainment of sensual pleasure and would mean that we should seek to maximize pleasure by
feeling it more intensely, Epicurus' position was that we should seek pleasure as ATARAXIA.
Ataraxia is a state of tranquility where pleasure is an absence of pain as a lack of anxiety.
For Epicurus, people worry too much about things over which they have no control, and most
especially in this regard, they worry about death. Epicurus seeks to describe a life, and
exhort others to become adherents to a sort of life, in which pleasure as ataraxia is the goal.
First principles of a good life:
1. Believe that god is a being immortal and blessed.
2. Remember that death is nothing to us. Everything that is either good or evil is associated
with sensation. Since death is the absence of sensation, there is nothing either good or
evil in death. Death is nothing to us, and recognizing that, we can make the mortality of
life enjoyable. There is nothing terrible in life to the person who understands that there
is nothing terrible in not living. Death does not concern either the living or the dead
because for the living there is no death (because they are alive); and for the dead there
is no concern with death because they are not living and do not exist.
3. Be free of disturbance. This is the aim of a life of blessedness. We always act to avoid
pain and fear. We recognize pleasure as the first good and judge everything by the good.
4. Grow accustomed to simple things, not luxurious things. Simple foods alleviate hunger
just as well as extravagant ones. In fact, the simple foods are better: they do not
cause pain from excess.
It is absolutely necessary to know the principles of natural science. We are naturally troubled
by our suspicions and wonder about things of the universe, and about death. For Epicurus, a
person cannot dispel fears about the universe without science, so we must seek understanding
rather than remain in mystery and ignorance. Without natural science, it is impossible to attain
our pleasures.
XXVII. Friendship is the greatest possession a person can have in the quest for blessedness.
VIRTUE THEORY FROM EPICURUS TO AQUINAS:
Philosophical Hedonism
Ataraxia
Anxiety
Knowledge
Simplicity
Pleasure
Problems with Epicurus view
Epictetus: (Stoicism)
Indifference and apathy, literal = no feeling.
Apathy
Rationality
Tranquility
Their conception of nature
Internal Inconsistencies, if the universe is a deterministic system, then can people choose
whether to conform to it?
"MAN IS A FRAGMENT TORN FROM GOD"
BEAR AND FOREBEAR
Augustine:
Conscience
Morality is a "flight of the soul away from the world." = moral perfection. (Notice the affinity
to the view of Plato in Republic.)
An analogy: Gods love draws the soul to god in the way that the weight of a physical body draws
it to the earth. Of course, the direction of the soul is the opposite (up), so the movement of
the soul caused by Gods grace is a flight of the soul way from the world.
A negative tone to Augustines works. The body is not bad in itself, but it torments us, and in
the same way, social life is not bad in itself, but we need stern authority, rulers thus ought to
be obeyed because they are ordained by God to rule, and this is better than civil war (akin to
internal strife in an individual soul). The body is our punishment for sins, and wicked rulers are
our punishment, too, to revolt against them is to revolt against God.
There is no view in Augustine of trying to alter arrangements, this would imply
discontent with Gods plan. So ethical value is in motive, not accomplishment.
It is important to discharge ones social duties, but even these may get in the way of
salvation if we are distracted by them from our devotion to God.
Aquinas:
Catholic doctrine and Greek thought combined, Christian theology
Natural Theology
Aquinas purpose: to give a true account of virtue compelling to any rational being.
Natural law is discovered by right reason.
Aquinas view is a form of consequentialist eudaimonism, right action is conduct tending to
promote human flourishing. There is a distinctive and essential human nature and set of values
that constitute excellence in the conduct of life.
What does Christian thought generally add to Aristotles ethics?
There must be one final good. The highest happiness is knowledge, but supernatural happiness is
also knowledge. It is knowledge of God. Fulfilling oneself as an intellectual substance, one
becomes more like God.
There is a universal order of reason. The right action is the one conforming to reason, to law,
to nature. The good will is in agreement with the divine will, the bad will is the one that goes
off on its own, out of harmony with divine will.
Eternal law is Gods decree. All things obey eternal law, but we are more complex, and have the
power to know what we are doing. Thus eternal law experienced by us is natural law.
Faith in God perfects our earthly existence and knowledge by giving us absolute and eternal truth
that transcends the truth of reason.
VIRTUE THEORY GENERALLY:
Maximalist ethical theory
Provides a strong motivation to morality, not egoistic, not minimal, says more than
"do no harm."
It is more than a legal model, of rule-following only. It is a manner of living life.
Does not overemphasize autonomy, does not underemphasize the effect of community.
Some major problems with virtue theory:
a. epistemological, what is the criterion for values? What counts as moral when
conceptions of virtue change?
b. Moral direction, what to do? How to solve moral dilemmas.
Function = good of a thing/particular, unique function, purpose, goal = Teleological.
The Good, the good, and human good.
- Form = extramental, extraordinary kind of existence.
Reality = Plato
Aristotle = Form is inside of a thing. Notion that the good is something natural. Ask people what their goal is. The ultimate goal is happiness. The quality of life fit for a human being, depends on the notion and the fact of human function. The good of a thing is determined by its function.
Rationality = "All men by nature desire to know" What's the rationality behind their theory or thought?
Geocentric Theory: That the Sun and Planets are perfect circles, moving in
perfect circles around the Earth.
Planets (eternal): unchanging and unmoving
Earth (temporal): imperfect, changing
(we are supposed to be the best that we can be)
God is the unmoved mover and maker of the Universe
Being qua (as) Being
God + Matter
(one in which we are attempting to be better)
Aristotle is the foundation for Catholic Theology by St. Thomas Aquinas.
eEmployment of rationality consistent with our goal of being
Happiness: An activity of the soul in accordance with perfect virtue,
education, property, wife, money, children, servants, weapons, family, healthy, Greek man.
(Aristotle thinks women can't reach happiness)
1. Mean
2. Decide
3. Firm and unchanging Character
4. Know
O O O O O O O O O O
| | | | | | | | | |
|_______|_______|_______|_______| |_______|_______|_______|_______|
| | | | | |
Deficiency The right Excess Cowardice Courage Foolhardiness
thing to do
You don't become courageous in one action. You can however say that the action was courageous.
Voluntary Mixed Actions involuntary O O O O O | | | | | |_______|_______|_______|_______| | | /\ /\ / \ / \ Decide Ignorance Forced Ignorance
Archery Theory: It takes practice to hit the bullseye. Just as it takes practice to follow the Doctrine of Mean and become a good person. It's easy to be a jerk and not care. But it is very difficult to be the best person that you can be. The bullseye is the goal which is God.
Dr. Stanlick suggested a book by R.G. Mulgan called "Aristotle's Political Theory". Which talks about whether Aristotle leads to a cultural relativism.
What you do produces who you are.
Knowledge, simplicity and pleasure lead to the good life.
Ignorant and uneducated people are people that worry about things they don't understand and can't see.
Education is a major way to living the good life.
Altaraxia: is Tranquility.
Epicurus was a materialist. He believed that the Universe was made up of matter which was
either moving or not. Moving matter is good and pleasurable. And the lack of motion is pain.
Hobbes's Method as Background
Resolutive-Compositive Method
THE STATE OF NATURE
- The result of the resolutive part of the method.
- Absolute government - a result of the compositive part of the method
Hobbes's View of Human Nature
- Self-interest
- Survival
- Desire/Aversion = Love/Hate
These vary between individual people and within the particular individual. There is no absolute
good. There is no good or evil except as each person considers his or her own desires and
aversions at any particular time.
Natural Equality expressed in 3 ways:
1. Destruction
2. Hope
3. Experience
Equality MUST be overcome
- This leads to contention
3 causes of quarrel:
1. competition
2. diffidence
3. glory
"The first makes men invade for Gain; the second, for Safety; and the third,for Reputation. The first use Violence, to make themselves Masters of othermen's persons, wives, children, and cattle; the second, to defend them; the third, for trifles, as a word, a smile, a different opinion, and any other sign of undervalue, either direct in their Persons, or by reflection in their Kindred, their Friends, their Nation, their Profession, or their Name."
THE STATE OF WAR
". . . the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."
Human behavior in the S of N, S of W is NOT SINFUL.
Two cardinal virtues in war - Force; Fraud
There is no such thing as injustice in the S of Nature/S of War
- See p. 109, GTIE: Even if there was no historical time period in which a "state of nature"
existed, it does not invalidate Hobbes's position.
- Note that individual political states are in a constant state of war (whether it consists of
actual fighting or the propensity to it).
The right of nature (see GTIE, 110): Everyone is free to defend himself and to
use all means available to do so.
- There is NO SIN in the behavior of human beings in the natural condition. We even behave in
similar ways when organized society exists.
- See also GTIE, p. 112, bottom, where Hobbes points out that in the natural condition, everyone
has a right to everything, even to another person's body.
The rational person will wish to leave the condition of war, and it will be achieved in part
by reason, in part by passion.
Reason = recognition of the laws of nature
Passion = emotions inclining a person to peace:
fear of death, desire for things necessary to "commodious living" and hope by one's industry to
be able to obtain them.
See full text of LEV, chapters 13 and 14 of Part I.
A LAW OF NATURE: "A PRECEPT OR GENERAL RULE, FOUND OUT BY REASON, BY WHICH A MAN IS FORBIDDEN TO DO THAT, WHICH IS DESTRUCTIVE OF HIS LIFE, OR TAKETH AWAY THE MEANS OF PRESERVING THE SAME; AND TO OMIT THAT, BY WHICH HE THINKETH IT MAY BE BEST PRESERVED."
Fundamental Law: "Every man, ought to endeavor peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek, and use, all helps, and advantages of war." This means, essentially, to seek peace; and when peace cannot be found, defend yourself.
2nd Law: "A man be willing, when others are so too, as far forth, as for peace, and defense of himself he shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and be contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himself."
3rd. Law: "Men (must) perform their covenants made."
Other laws of nature....When the right to all things is transferred to the
sovereign, all matters of ethics belong to the sovereign, not to the individual. AUTHORIZATION
VIEW OF SOVEREIGNTY AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF "WORKABLE" MORAL RULES.
-The questions on p. 118 of GTIE should be helpful.
Natural Equality expressed in 3 ways:
1. Destruction
2. Hope
3. Experience
Equality MUST be overcome
This leads to contention
3 causes of quarrel:
1. competition
2. diffidence
3. glory
"The first makes men invade for Gain; the second, for Safety; and the third, for Reputation. The first use Violence, to make themselves Masters of othermen's persons, wives, children, and cattle; the second, to defend them; the third, for trifles, as a word, a smile, a different opinion, and any other sign of undervalue, either direct in their Persons, or by reflection in their Kindred, their Friends, their Nation, their Profession, or their Name."
". . . the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."
Human behavior in the S of N, S of W is NOT SINFUL.
Two cardinal virtues in war - F and F
There is no such thing as injustice in the S of N/S of W
The rational person will wish to leave the condition of war, and it will be achieved in part
by reason, in part by passion.
- Reason = recognition of the laws of nature
- Passion = emotions inclining a person to peace: fear of death, desire for things necessary to
"commodious living" and hope by one's industry to be able to obtain them.
See full text of LEV, chapters 13 and 14 of Part I.
- Inequality does not exist in the natural condition. Any inequality that exists is the result
of civil laws, not natural ones.
- We MUST recognize each other as equal by nature? Why? "If Nature therefore have made men equal,
that equality is to be acknowledged: or if Nature have made men unequal; yet because men that
think themselves equal will not enter into conditions of Peace, but upon Equal terms, such
equality must be admitted.
- And therefore for the ninth law of Nature, I put this, that every man acknowledge others
for his Equal by Nature. The breach of this Precept is Pride."
10th law: Do not reserve any right for yourself that you would not allow to others. Those who break this law are arrogant - (vainglorious)
11th law: Judges must deal Equally between all people. This is equity.
12th law: Things capable of division are enjoyed in common; otherwise, proportional to right.
In society, those who are acknowledged to be "great" are more to be condemned for transgressions than the ordinary person, since the "great" have "least need to commit them."
There must be equal benefit from the law - because every person values his own life equally, whether poor or rich.
Note: People are to be taxed according to what they USE and anyone rendered incapable of work is to be cared for by the government; those able to work are to be FORCED to do so.
1. Virtue - what the action is to gain and keep value - what one acts to gain
and keep.
2. Only one alternative in the universe - to live or not to live.
3. We do not have an instinct to preserve ourselves, only a desire. An instinct
would be to know how to do it.
4. Everything conducive to survival is good - the reverse is evil.
5. Man=s life = the standard of morality One=s own life is his purpose. A being
who does not hold his own life as the motive and purpose is acting on the standard of death.
6. Help others only as you desire based on selfish pleasure in the value of his
person and his struggle.
Ethical egoism endorses selfishness, not foolishness.
NOTE: all of these are non-egoistic reasons. Paradoxical.
- Everything you do in life is power, until you die.
- Right is a freedom, a law is an obligation.
- No absolute good or evil.
- We form a government to ensure peace. "E Plurbis Unum" from many, one.
- Theory of Contracts (Chapter 16 of Leviathan)
Thomas Jefferson stole most of the his ideas for the Declaration of Independance from Locke.
Hobbes - The function of the Government = is to get out of war to stay alive.
Locke:
- State we are rational and peaceful.
- The Government is needed to regulate and preserve your property. This also brings about the
rise of capitalism and materialism.
- Was very religious.
- Absolute Monarchy will not work.
- Was a racist and a slave trader.
- Don't form a Government to make life possible, form a Government to regulate and preserve your
property (or inconveniences).
Perserving one's own life and to preserve the rest of mankind and not to interfere in other's rights to life, liberty, or property.
How does Locke transcend the spoilage limitation?
- Creating money results in enequaled distribution but it is just.
- Right and wrong are determined by the Law of Nature.
Locke, from The Second Treatise of Government
The function of government - regulation and preservation of property.
This claim implies, of course, that for Locke, property ALREADY exists in the natural condition.
The state of nature - a condition of freedom and equality in which each person is free to "dispose
of his person and possessions as he sees fit within the bounds of the law of nature." For Locke,
the state of nature is to be used as a measure of the rights people ought to retain in the political
state.
What is the Lockean Law of Nature? An obligation to preserve oneself and, when one's own life
"comes not in competition," one ought, "as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind" and
not interfere in others' rights to life, liberty, or property.
Locke's view appears to be that people will generally follow the law of nature because
they are naturally rational and not given to constant war (as Hobbes supposed).
The state of war - a consequence of the state of nature OR of a political state that is contrary
to the natural rights that people possess. The S of W occurs when one or more people
attempt to put another person or persons under their absolute, arbitrary power.
For Locke, the state of war shows why government is necessary, but also why it must be
limited - to protect and regulate property. It must be limited in order to preserve
peace, life, and property.
The state of war is caused by a "noxious few" who do NOT make conditions in the state of
nature unbearable, but instead make it INCONVENIENT. It is inconvenient to have to be
the enforcer, the judge, the jury, and the executioner of the requirements of the law of
nature. The creation of a political society would cure the inconveniences of the natural
condition. But no Lockean would EVER found a government that caused them more trouble
than they had in the natural condition. Locke puts it like this, in section 93: "To ask
how yo may be guarded from harm, or injury, on that side where the strongest hand is to do
it, is presently the voice of faction and rebellion: as if when men quitting the state of
nature entered into society, they agreed that all of them but one, should be under the
restraint of laws, but that he shoudl still retain all the liberty of the state of nature,
increased with power, and made licentious by impunity. This is to think, that men are so
foolish, that they take care to avoid what mischiefs may be done them by pole-cats, or
foxes; but are content, nay, think it safety, to be devoured by lions."
For Locke, then, to establish an absolute government is not only practically absurd, it is
also logically absurd. Why would a person who wishes to protect his life and property
submit to a government that could take both away? Absolute government would be self-
defeating. At least in the natural condition, every person has a right to self-defense.
Why would a person who possesses in himself LESS THAN ABSOLUTE POWER OVER HIMSELF ever be
able to grant absolute power to anyone else? You can't give to another more than you have.
How does Locke argue for the natural right to property?
God as creator/man as creation = Property in one's own person/the gift of life is given by God =
Property in one's own person --> Property in one's own labor --> Property in "necessities"
gained by labor = The "spoilage limitation" = How does one transcend the spoilage
limitation? Results in unequal, but not unjust, distribution.
Locke describes the condition of nature as generally abundantly supplied with necessities.
Compare this to Hobbes's claims about scarcity.
For Locke, law, morality, justice and property all exist prior to the formation and establishment
of government and any government that transgresses the law of nature has put itself into
a state of war with its own citizens. AND SO, REVOLUTION IS JUSTIFIED AGAINST A GOVERNMENT
WHEN IT VIOLATES THE NATURAL RIGHTS OF ITS CITIZENS.
Notice that in Hobbes's contract theory, revolution is never justified UNLESS the government
fails reasonably to assure the maintenance of the lives of its citizens from danger
INTERNAL to the government/society created.
Prescriptive Ethics = Normative - ought to be.
Descriptive Ethics = Archealogical, socialogical.
Meta Ethics = Talking about ethics, or the meaning of ethics + terms. What
it can and can't do.
Kant was an Absolutist
Hume and Kant pushed ethics to a new level.
John Locke: Nobody has the right to absolute power over other people.
- Reason to promote a government is to make your life easier.
In the Middle Ages, moral injunctions were more often than not found in the authority of the
Church. The reason anyone would want to do or be good was simply that it was commanded that they
do so. In place of the authority of the Church, modern philosophers sought the ground of morality
in Reason itself. Hume, however, with his anti-Rationalist frame of mind, found neither Church
authority nor the authority of reason convincing or acceptable as the foundation of ethics.
These are some of the arguments in the works of Hume against reason as the basis of moral theory.
That reason judges only matters of fact and relations. This distinction is found in Hume's
epistemology, in which he argues that reason is impotent to judge or determine anything regarding
issues that are not either relations of ideas or matters of fact. This distinction can be seen
in his argument that the principles of universal causation and nature's uniformity are not grounded
in reason. They are, instead, objects of faith or belief. The argument runs, generally, as follows:
1. All the objects of human reason are either relations of ideas or matters of fact.
The distinction here is between necessary truths and contingent truths.
2. The principle of nature's uniformity, that the future will resemble the past, is not
a relation of ideas because its denial is conceivable. It is conceivable that
the future will not resemble the past.
3. Therefore, the PNU must be a matter of fact, i.e., it must be verifiable in our
experience.
4. But, the PNU is not a matter of fact, since it can never be verified in our experience.
That is, there is no guarantee that the future will resemble the past.
5. Therefore, the PNU is not an object of our reason or knowledge.
- The question now remains what it is. Hume asserts that it must be an object of belief or faith
since it is not grounded on reasoning or any process of human understanding. We believe strongly
through custom and habit that the future will resemble the past.
- Relating this to moral theory, the following must be the case. Consider a particular moral
judgment (e.g., that some action, X, is a crime). There is nothing in the concept of X rendering
it necessarily true that X is a crime. There are occasions on which X might be considered a
non-crime. Thus it is not an object of reason.
- What ensues in the case of that which we call a moral act is a moral judgment. This moral
judgment is an active feeling or sentiment. What we do is FEEL some sentiment of blame or
approbation. This is the source of the claim that an action is virtuous or vicious.
- Inanimate things may bear all the same relations to each other that moral agents bear to each
other. Hume gives the example of a tree that topples its parent, which is no different in fact
from the human who does the same thing. If morality consisted in relations, then we would say
that the tree in question was to be held morally responsible for its actions. However, we do not.
- All the actions of human beings can never be accounted for by reason. This is clear in the
case of Aristotle, for example, who claims that the ultimate reason for our actions is the
attainment of happiness. But when we ask why anyone desires to be happy, he can give no answer.
It is an ultimate end, and never referred to any other object. Thus, the actions of man have no
dependence on the intellectual faculties in the long run. It is always a sentiment of approval
or disapproval that finally determines the actions we perform.
Hume's position does not imply that reason has no place in ethics, but it does imply that it has
a subordinate place. That is, Hume claims, "Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the
passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them." In other words,
we use reason in order to be able to attain our ends, but the process is distinct from the end.
The end is a matter of sentiment, not a matter of rationality, though the end may be achieved by
the use of reason.
Hume was not a normative moral theorist. He may be, in fact, the first of the meta-ethicists
since he was not concerned to determine what we OUGHT to do, but instead was concerned with what
terms like 'ought,' 'virtue,' and 'moral' mean. His position leads to the conclusion that we
cannot demonstrate moral conclusions from factual judgments.
The Nature of Moral Goodness in Hume's Moral Theory:
Moral virtue is distinguished from all other kinds of goodness by the following:
1. It is a pleasure resulting from a consideration of character or motive.
2. It is disinterested approbation.
We may consider a thing good because it is useful to us. When we call a thing beautiful, it is
because it has a certain capacity to excite or arouse in us certain feelings that we find pleasant
or agreeable. But there is more than this in the case of moral judgments. What is more is that
we see in moral judgments something of character or motive regarding the person who performs an
action. This is not the case in the examples of the beauty of a horse, or a statue, for that matter.
In reference to this claim, Hume argues against the egoism of Hobbes and others (like DeMandeville)
by claiming:
1. Egoism contradicts the obvious facts about human conduct. All we need to do is
to see that there are dispositions such as benevolence and generosity, friendship,
love, gratitude and compassion. Since this is the obvious appearance of things,
it must be admitted that egoism is a false doctrine.
2. Egoism forces us to make claims that move us toward a much more complicated
psychological theory than is warranted by the evidence. An example used is that
of the man whose rich and powerful friend dies. From such a person we might be
able to claim that his sorrow at the death of his friend results from self-interest
such that he expected some benefit from this friend. But what about a case in
which the friend is poor, and has no influence? How are we to explain in this case?
3. Self-love cannot be our only good since its satisfaction depends on the satisfaction
of various other, particular desires. It is clear, for example, that eating is
pleasant, but it is not always to be considered self-interested. Thus, the problem
is not that self-interest is immoral. It is simply bad psychology.
The Nature of Moral Disagreements:
- It is not the case that Hume claims that morals are so subjective that it is impossible that we
can have moral agreement. The feeling of benevolence, for example, is present in all of us
(though it differs in strength) and it is universal.
- Disagreements in morality come about through differences concerning whether conduct being
evaluated is useful to mankind. Such things can be determined through an analysis of empirical
facts. We should therefore be able to reach agreement.
Notes from the Text:
1. Hume's moral theory, like his epistemological one, centers on beliefs or feelings that we have.
In the case of epistemology, we believe that like causes will produce like effects, but we cannot
penetrate to the real essence. We find constant conjunctions between causes and effects. But
this does not mean that there is any necessary connection between them. In the same way, we see
constant conjunctions between certain actions and our feelings of moral approbation or disapprobation.
We may therefore tend to believe that they are in some way connected.
2. Hume was not a relativist. Since we all have basically the same psychological make-up, our
moral responses will be, for the most part, comparable.
- Reason judges only matters of fact and relations.
i.e. White shoes are white.
i.e. That newspaper is on the floor.
- Reason ought to be the slave of passions. Telss you how to go after something.
1. Logical - If we are all the creation and property of
God, then we do not have absolute power over ourselves.
We cannot, therefore, grant absolute power to a
sovereign or government. In essence, you can't give
more power to someone else than you already have over
yourself.
2. Practical - The reason for establishing government,
for Locke, is to regulate and preserve property. This
means, of course, that you already possess property in
the natural condition. So if you establish absolute
government, you essentially give it the power to TAKE
AWAY what you originally had intended government to
protect. It would be impractical, then, to establish
absolute government.
Rules of morality must be laws, and laws, which are derived from reason, must apply universally.
They are therefore without exception.
Actions are the result, not the determining factor, of morality. The action is the result, not
the requirement, of morality.
Some of Kant's favorite moral examples:
The Lying Promise. Why is it morally wrong to make a promise and not intend to keep it?
Suicide. Why is suicide morally wrong?
Developing Talents. Why is it morally wrong to leave your abilities unused?
Being Kind. Why is it morally wrong to be nasty?
Defining features of Kant's moral theory:
- Human beings have dignity; moral worth
- Morality can be summed up in one principle, the Categorical Imperative
- Why the categorical imperative is different from, and superior to, a hypothetical imperative.
A moral system built on a system of hypothetical imperatives might warrant approval, but
it cannot warrant respect.
- The C.I. is a) universal, and b) the embodiment of morality in terms of duty, not consequences.
2 (of 3) formulations of the C.I. = universality and respect for persons/means-ends
- The good will is the only thing good without qualification.
Why wealth, health, a good sense of humor are not good without qualification
- Duty=the necessity of an action done out of respect for the moral law.
Why reason should be, and is, the ruler of the will:
All natural endowments have a particular function or purpose
Inclination and emotion are unacceptable as rulers of the will
It is not enough that an action be done:
Can be done by accident, so intent is necessary
Intent is not enough. There must be a principle
But not just any principle is good enough. It must be a universally binding principle.
The principle must be the categorical imperative, because it is universally binding.
Comments:
Universalizing absurd moral rules
If X is universalizable, then X is right
- What is right to do = you figure out by reason.
- What is good to do = you figure out by emotion.
- The right ought to take precident over the good.
- Kant wasn't talking about civil laws = he was talking about Natural Laws like
Gravity, discovered by observing.
- Kant argued why couldn't Moral Laws be universal. Observed by reason.
- Kant was looking for one rule of morality.
- Kant's Naturalistic Explanation concerning why reason must be the ruler of the
will rather than emotion or inclination.
- In the human body, there is no organ that exists for no purpose.
Inclinations are based on desires + self interests.
Rationality leads to Universal Moral Laws.
Privileging of reason = Starting off with the wrong information.
Lie = falsehood; Promise = truth
It's logically absurd to tell a true lie.
Suicide = absurd to end your life to make it better because ending your life means your life is
over.
Ethics are Disinterested Decisions
Categorical Imperative:
Categorical = Universal, Rational
Imperative = Must, Requirment, Right
Categorical Imperative = "Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."
Maxim = (Rule of action) Rationally decide that everybody else should do X
This is the Universal Criterion
The respect for persons formulation or criterion: "Always treat rational beings, whether in the
person of yourself or others, always as an end only and never merely as a means to an end."
= Dignity, owed respect from others.
Mother of Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein.
MW on the dignity and value of humanity, the equality/inequality of women.
Women are kept in a state of perpetual childhood. The most important thing is the development of character because "elegance is inferior to virtue."
Women have always been "either a slave or a despot,...and each of these situations equally retards the progress of reason."
There is an odd view of respect for women. Men expect women to be weak. Men pride themselves on paying "this arbitrary insolent respect to the sex, with the most scrupulous exactess, and are most inclined to tyranize over, and despise, the very weakness they cherish."
Men bow to women. Isn't this odd? If women are inferior to men, isn't it "condenescension to bow to an inferior"? So ludicrous, in fact, do these ceremonies appear to me, that I scarcely am able to govern my muscles when I see a man start with eager and serious solicitude to life a hankercheif or shut a door, when the lady could have done it herself, had she only moved a pace or two."
She points out that currently, there is no middle ground for women. You're either a bitch or a wimp.
Novels, music, poetry - these things tend to make women creatures of sensation. This "relaxes" the powers of the mind and "prevents the intellect from attaining that sovereignty ehich it ought to attain to render a rational creature useful to others and content with its own station..."
Women are assumed not only to want to remain innocent and fragile, they are also expected to do so. To remain innocent is to remain in a state of childhood; to remain fragile is to be forced to look up to a man for every comfort. Triifling dangers (a mouse or a rat would be terribly scary) they can't handle. "In the name of reason, and even common sense, what can save such beings from contempt, even though they be soft and fair?..."
Strengh of body and mind are required of men and of women. Inferior reason will not enable a woman to perform any duty properly.
1. Section one is the introduction written by all the members of the group.
between 2-3 pages long with your own bibliography. Pick out the main thing taht wa stated in your own section and write a paragraph or two for the introduction.
2. Explanatory/Interpretive (Due April 2nd)
3. Critical/Analytical (Due April 2nd)
between 2-5 pages long with your own bibliography.
4. The conclusion, written by all the members of the group.
between 2-5 pages long.
5. Bibliography
Needs to be 1.5" spacing
Needs 1" margins
Times New Roman
No spelling or grammar errors
Must be saved in Microsoft Word, .txt, or .rtf file formats.
Graded on content = 35%
Critical analysis = 35%
Grammar, spelling, and P = 30%
Objectification = Things that are to be used. The facts and nothing more.
Subjectification = The infusion of a human being into the content.
Species Being = A free, universal, valuable being..
- The objectification of the human being happens in the objectification of human labor.
- Labor can be stored.
- The class of the capitalists pay the workers the bare minimum to survive, then the capitalists keep the rest of the money for themselves.
- The capitalist system dehumanizes people.
- People become dispensible and disposable.
- People lose something when false needs are created.
Communism is the negation of the negation: Communism is the negation of private property, which negates the human being.
- If you abolish private ownership, you negate the negation.
- Communism negates capitalism.
- Our work ought to be something that fullfills us, not something that makes life possible.
- "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
- Marx says that ever human being deserves respect and value.
Utilitarianism = is happiness, the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.
What you know is what everybody is after. A person whose actions create and expand happiness.
Generally, most of the time our lives are not far reaching enough to have an effect on a large number of people.
Utilitarianism is a Teleological results based theory. The general tendancy is good people produce good actions, and bad people produce bad actions.
Mills argued that it applies not just to the individual but to society as well.
Social institutions should lead to the possibilty of human flourishing.
One of the elements is to have the right and capacity to find the right conception of good.
Mill is not set in the sterotype that we have to set up societies consistant with the abilities of the individual.
The ultimate principle of morality is the Principle of Utility.
Mental/Intellectual pleasures are superior to physical ones.
Some objections (and replies) to Utilitarianism:
- Happiness is unattainable.
- Does mankind have a right to be happy?
- It is exacting too much from people to think that they will act to produce the greatest happiness.
- Utilitarianism is a Godless doctrine.
- Time constraints
Mill's "On Liberty" - Respect for the individual and for individuality are two of the conditions for the creation of social happiness.
External - Hope of favor, religious, physical
Internal - The Ultimate Sanction/Conscience
Utilitarians do not tell you what type of character you have to have just so long as you do not screw with anybody else's.
Good actions tend to be produced by people with good character.
Sociopaths are people who these sanctions will not work.
Act and Rule Utilitarianism
How to distribute the Good
What of the minority?