Philosophy 110: Introduction to Ethics
Extra Credit
Earn 10 points of extra credit for every question answered correctly, up to 100 points.
Ethical Relativism
What is the basic principle of ethical relativism?
What are some problems that arise for relativism? Which apply to benign relativists, which to debunking relativists, and which to both?
Plato: Euthyphro
Socrates claims that he doesn’t know anything. If that’s the case, how does he respond to the definitions his interlocutor puts forward?
Euthyphro tweaks his definition and comes up with: what is dear to all the gods/God is pious and what is hated by all the gods/God is impious. Socrates doesn’t think that explains anything. Why not?
Utilitarianism (John Stuart Mill On Liberty)
What are the five major problems that arise for act utilitarianism?
What is the difference between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism?
Kantian Ethics
What would you do, in order to determine whether or not an individual rule you’re thinking of undertaking is in accord with universal law? (How do you apply the Categorical Imperative?)
Why does Kant think you should recognize that you must always treat other rational beings as ends in themselves, and never merely as means?
Virtue Ethics (Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics)
What are the two parts to developing into a person who can find the Golden Mean, and why are both parts necessary?
What do virtue ethicists think about ethical principles?
Ethical Relativism
ReplyDeleteWhat is the basic principle of ethical relativism? What are some problems that arise for relativism? Which apply to benign relativists, which to debunking relativists, and which to both?
The basic principle of ethical relativism is the basic idea or law is the most basic ethical rule. For example: We must always treat other people with dignity. This idea shows that the ethical principle of treating all people as moral equals is our belief or basic idea. This belief gives it a strong force and then becomes basic human law. There is really no grounding for the principle of ethics when it comes to relativism. Since ethical principles are just a matter of taste. Ethical relativism is founded only on the fact that a particular society prevailing beliefs say this hold legitimate in that society. This creates obligations that must be up held in a society making certain things forbidden. To a debunking relativist they see many flaws when making up these basic laws. Since ethical principles are based on the prevailing belief of the society a debunking relativist says you don’t have a clear motivation for following your society’s beliefs. Benign Relativism says you should follow your societies prevailing beliefs since our way of living are centrally important to the way you experience life. They also believe that your society’s beliefs do count as a reason behind your motivations. So in the end society believes that there is right and wrong way to follow your society’s beliefs. It’s only relative to your society.
Utilitarianism (John Stuart Mill On Liberty)
What are the five major problems that arise for act utilitarianism? What is the difference between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism?
Utilitarianism believes we should act in a way that brings about the greatest good for the greatest number and to minimize suffering for all concerned. There are several problems that arise when trying to make utilitarianism work for a society. First trying to figure out timing can be very unpredictable. Second there is the sacrifice of an individual because the basic set of right protects the will of the majority and oppresses the minority. Third everyone suffers pain and enjoys pleasure, so a good act is one that brings about pleasure and a bad act is one that brings about pain. So you have to keep in mind that you might be mistaken what is good for one person might not be good for another person. Fourth the person you disagree with might have some truth or insight and if oppressed you won’t become exposed to. You can’t learn from it or benefit. Finally even if you’re completely right you have to examine your own beliefs as a matter of faith and that makes them very weak. Act utilitarianism believes you must take a straight forward approach to deciding what will bring about the greatest good for the greatest number and minimizes suffering. The way to determine this is to take all the actions in to account and also all the situations for each actions. They are separated into two list being utility created and disutility created. Deciding what goes where depends on the degree of welfare taken into account. The greater suffering counts more as a disutility and this is subtracted from the utility. Rule utilitarianism does it differently instead of applying the basic principle to each individual action. Rule Utilitarianism focuses on creating a set of moral codes so to minimize suffering for all active beings. First you think about what’s the utility of having people follow the rules? Then the disutility of the having people follow the rules? Third what are the costs of establishing and maintaining that rule?
Kantian Ethics
ReplyDeleteWhat would you do, in order to determine whether or not an individual rule you’re thinking of undertaking is in accord with universal law? (How do you apply the Categorical Imperative?) Why does Kant think you should recognize that you must always treat other rational beings as ends in themselves, and never merely as means?
In order to find out whether or not and individual rule should be come universal law there are several steps that must be thought over. First you would try to find if there is a universal principle on how we must act. Not to be confused with how we do act. Second we want to find out if the rule gets us beyond human desires. Your desires are strongly socially conditions and we are trying to find out if this rule is not socially conditioned. Third you can not be ruled by your reason since your reason is ruled by yourself. Kant says I should never act in such a way that I treat humanity, whether in myself or in others, as a means only, but always as an ends in itself. This is another way in which you’re being ruled by reason. Your trying to recognize the fundamental basic respect you owe. This means that all human being are owed a basic regard merely because they are human beings.
Virtue Ethics (Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics)
What are the two parts to developing into a person who can find the Golden Mean, and why are both parts necessary? What do virtue ethicists think about ethical principles?
Establishing a virtue for your self try’s to bestow a foundation for good character. This way you can make good judgments when faced with difficult decisions. You will be able to make good judgments when confronted with moral questions. Having good virtues taught to you as a child will develop characters you need and can share your concerns, sympathy and loyalty you feel for your immediate circle. By doing this your virtues that you share can ripple out to a broader community. Also having good characters is the best possible shot you have at having a happy life. So virtues people having a happy existence makes a well functions societies leading to functioning people. Virtue ethics tries to create a balance between extremes. Each thing has an essence that is the thing that makes is what it is. For humans the essence is the capacity for reason. This is a creative emotion and you need to exercise that essence. This way you can turn your human potential into something actual. These virtues are the way of helping to actualize human potential. They do this by first using reason to find the right balance between extremes. Then find the right time for the right thing in the right way toward the right thing. You’re trying this in order to instill good characteristics behaviors and attitudes in yourself.