Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (620,000)
U of C (8,000)
PHIL (100)
Lecture 1

PHIL 249 Lecture Notes - Lecture 1: Consequentialism


Department
Philosophy
Course Code
PHIL 249
Professor
Noa Latham
Lecture
1

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 19 pages of the document.
Philosophy 249 lecture 1 September 10, 2014
Good/bad:
Actions/people
States of affairs
Right/wrong:
Actions
Required ----- neutral ----- prohibited
1) Without god, morality would be subjective
a) Morality is objective
b) Therefore god exists
2) Valid Argument: Conclusion must be true, premises are true
3) Sound Argument: argument is valid and premises are true
4) ~B if then, ~A (not b, if then, not a)
5) Divine Command Theory:
a) X is required because God commands x
b) X is wrong because God forbids it
6) Divine Love Theory:
a) X is good because God loves it
b) God loves x because x is good
Lecture 2 September 12, 2014
A.) Moral Principles are commands of God that we have reason to obey.
If MP’S aren’t commands of God, we have no reason to obey them
B.) MP’s are commands of God
If not B, then not A

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Lecture 3 September 15, 2014
What are the premises and conclusion of the argument? Is it valid? Is it
sound?
Inner moral compass
Ancient Greeks- religion separate from moral compass
Moral motivation vs. moral knowledge
Non religious source of motivation- not believing in heaven, doing the
right thing
Non religious moral knowledge- inner moral compass
How do you choose a religion?
Some parts of religion are taking literally and others are interpreted
and applied to the individuals own values
Example: wool coats, Sabbath, book of Leviticus (evidence that we
have our own moral values)
Hard passages to interpret passages result in different moral standards
Can’t rely on religion as a source of moral knowledge unclear as to
which is plausible
Choose a religion, interpret religion, apply to the individual
Religious texts give us some moral compass
Utilitarianism:
Theory of life
What is good for a person?
John Stuart Mill
oHad an unusual education
oText on the subject of women
To say something is intrinsically good for you is because it’s good as
end (it’s good because of the pleasure at the time. Its intrinsically
good because there are no further consequences). Whereas where
something is good as a means, is called instrumentally good (in the
end it’s good)
Hedonistic: the ONLY things in life that are intrinsically good are
pleasures. Those that are bad are pains
Lecture 4 September 17, 2014
The best life is the one with the greatest net balance of pleasures and
pains
oQuantity is measured my the duration & intensity

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

oQuality:
oMATRIX (blue and red pill)
The reality machine:
oDo things
oBeing in touch with reality
oBe someone
Lecture 5 September 19, 2014
Brandt's classification into four kinds of desires that are irrational
and not good to satisfy. After we've discussed his theory of irrational
desire we'll raise the question whether the satisfaction of a rational
desire is intrinsically good, and whether the best life is one with the
highest balance of satisfied to dissatisfied rational desires.
Desire Satisfaction Theory
Satisfaction of desires is intrinsically good and nothing else is
Frustration -------------------------------- bad -----------------------
Best life is the one with the highest net balance of satisfaction
over frustration desires
oIs the satisfaction of every desire intrinsically good?
Not every desire is intrinsically good
Desires that are based on false believe become irrational
oDoes the test survive some cognitive test where you’re
given all the vivid information
Desires in Cultural-Transmission
Mistake from Untypical Examples
oNot intrinsically good, or instrumentally good
Lecture 6 September 22, 2014:
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version