PHIL 106 Lecture Notes - Lecture 9: Virtue Ethics, Intellectual Virtue, Harm Principle
Document Summary
Rational thinking to problems not shown by science. Not defined by its subject= no definite subject matter: defined by methods. 2 types of traditional questions: meaning or justifications. Arguments: defined by a linguistic expression of reasoning consisting of premises (assumes true) & conclusion (inferred by premises: validity: connection between premises and conclusion. If premise is true so is the conclusion. Ex: all pigs can fly -> socrates is a pig -> socrates can fly= valid. Inductively strong arguments: assumptions that give arguments validity. How to show an argument is invalid: construct a scenario where premisces are true but conclusion is false, counter example (aristole) : give agument w/ same structure but make it false. Find obvious premises to arguments so people have to agree with the conclusion. Moral arguments: appeals to moral principles; evaluative conclusion. Moral principles: certain religions follow these (honor your parents) How to justify moral principle: use general moral principles.
