PHIL101 Study Guide - Midterm Guide: Moral Relativism, John Stuart Mill, Cultural Relativism

108 views9 pages
Arguments:
-good ones consider objections/counter examples
so that there are reasons to think that the reasons given for the initial position are mistaken
-HOW YOU CAN RESPOND:
showing how the objection is mistaken
-ex. relies on false assumptions, misinterprets your position, etc
modifying your position to account for the objection
appealing to independent principles or virtues of reason
-inference to the best explanation
illustrating how the objection actually proves too much
-has undesirable consequences
The Need for Ethical Theory:
-to see whether a basic ethical view is right and need to examine the grounds that might
support it
must be supported by plausible general principles
-THE BEST ETHICAL PRINCIPLES:
Should be compelling in their own right
analyze carefully what the principles are really saying
Morality:
-what we ought to do
-how we ought to live
-the type of person we ought to be
-these are prescriptions rather than descriptions
-fundamentally concerned with adjudicating conflict between multiple people
-this requires the consideration of reasons, some of which may be better than others
-Moral Objectivism:
these are objectively true moral principles
moral facts that are true and are true for reasons
whether an act is correct/incorrect depends on whether it is permitted/prohibited by a
set of universally valid moral principles
this isn't the same as commitment to ethnocentrism
-Moral Relativism:
theres no objectively true moral principles
there are no moral facts which are true for reasons independent of personal or cultural
acceptance
whether some act is correct/incorrect depends on whether its permitted/prohibited by
ones own view or the view ones society
more than merely than a descriptive claim
-description claim = cultural relativism
-moral claim = ethical relativism
Ethical Relativism:
-SUBJECTIVE ETHICAL RELATIVISM:
relative to the person
theres no ground for interpersonal criticism of action
here everyone is moral, just as long as they live by their own standards
its basically just how i want to live my life
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 9 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
-CULTURAL ETHICAL RELATIVISM:
conventionalism
relative to the society
cannot provide an argument for tolerance
-theres no grounds to be tolerant of other cultures unless thats what your culture dictates
but what counts as culture? if you're in multiple cultures what do you do?
-if i choose the one i like the best then thats subjectivism
Utilitarianism (JS Mills):
-an ethical theory
determining which actions are permissible and impermissible by looking at the
consequences of those actions
-since it only focuses on consequences its ignoring the difference between doing some
act and letting something happen
-if the outcome is positive then the act is right to do and vice versa
an objectivist position so its concerned with universalizability (what everyone should do)
and impartiality (suggests that ones own goods are no more important than the goods of
others)
-impartial; we all have equal important interest
-what is considered good?
good = pleasure, bad = pain
pleasure produces happens
-THEN, isn't this Hedonism?
no because hedonism says the right thing to do for me is what gives me pleasure
maximize ones own pleasure
-the good is the maximization of total aggregated pleasure
-Hedonistic Utilitarianism:
places the sensations of pleasure as the sole; ultimate good
not all goods are created earl
some things are valuable in and of themselves, while others are valuable as a means
to other things
-ex. happiness vs money
money is only good when wee need it, when people value it
-Non Hedonistic Utilitarianism:
experiences other than pleasure count as part of the good
-ex. mental state experienced in reading or confronting beauty
theres experiences that give you pleasure
J.S. Mill:
-not all pleasures are created equal
-things we should consider about:
Quantity — how much pleasure is felt and how long it lasts
-duration and intensity
Quality — some pleasure are better than others
-if 2 pleasures are being competed, the one that was more experienced will be chosen
-intellectual pleasures > beastly pleasures
Temporal Proximity — when the pleasure occurs
-immediate gratification vs gratification down the road
-anticipation (linked to quality concerns)
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 9 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
Hedonic Calculus:
-theoretically you can get a ranking from asking people what they like
Act Utilitarianism:
-stats that an act is morally right if it maximizes overall aggregate happiness for all those
affected
-right thing to do is maximize happiness and minimize pain
Rule Utilitarianism:
-an act is right if it conforms to a rule which, when adopted overall, maximizes aggregate
happiness
-actions are right if…
they fall under a general rule
the rule can be justified by appeal to the greatest happiness principle
-ex. dont lie
Deontology (Kant):
-gives an alternative to utilitarianism
-judge moral choices on the basis of weather or not they fulfill our duty
-choices cant be justified by their effect or consequences, no matter how good they might be
-our duty to others and ourselves are important
these aren't defined by consequences
-he opposed absolute monarchy and social position
-CENTRAL IDEAS:
dignity and reason
-the basis for each persons dignity, the most fundamental authority for each person’s
life, is her or his own reason
power of autonomy
-the right and responsibility to be self governing
-to control their destiny as much as possible
inalienable dignity
-limitations on treatment
-each persons dignity limits the exercise of power by others
-THE GOOD WILL:
this is the only thing good without qualifications
the determination to do as reason requires
the condition of value of everything else
unconditionally good regardless of the consequences followed by it
a determination to do what reason requires as right
-not the same as merely wishing something
choose to do whats right
-sometimes have to act contrary to what makes us happy
-happiness is imporatn but not as important as duty
-DUTY:
theres a difference between acting from inclination and acting from duty
theres a difference between doing what is duty requires vs doing your duty because it
is your duty
only when duty is done for duty’s sake is good will expressed properly
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 9 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Document Summary

Good ones consider objections/counter examples: so that there are reasons to think that the reasons given for the initial position are mistaken. How you can respond: showing how the objection is mistaken. Ex. relies on false assumptions, misinterprets your position, etc: modifying your position to account for the objection, appealing to independent principles or virtues of reason. Inference to the best explanation: illustrating how the objection actually proves too much. To see whether a basic ethical view is right and need to examine the grounds that might support it: must be supported by plausible general principles. The best ethical principles: should be compelling in their own right, analyze carefully what the principles are really saying. The type of person we ought to be. Fundamentally concerned with adjudicating con ict between multiple people. This requires the consideration of reasons, some of which may be better than others. Cultural ethical relativism: conventionalism, relative to the society, cannot provide an argument for tolerance.