4 PHILOSOPHY FINAL REVIEW Meta-ethics 1. What is the divine command theory of ethics? Right and wrong determined by the will of God Easy, convenient answer Most of the texts (Karan, Bible) have in some way been shown false Atheism: There is no God an argument must have a premise that the counterpoint agrees with; invalid argument when opposing DCT
2. What is Euthyphro's dilemma objection to the divine command theory? - Euthyphro: Honesty is good because God wills it - Socrates: Is honesty good because God wills it, or does God will honesty because it is good? 3. What does the cultural relativist think about morality? - Every culture varies in their own morality, and we should respect each culture for their belief systems; extreme tolerance for everything 4. Explain the cultural differences argument for relativism and the main objection to that argument. - If a society is intolerant, as extreme tolerants, we cannot preach to them tolerance because that would be immoral. The same as if someone in an intolerant society is tolerant. 5. Be able to explain two objections to cultural relativism. - Not allowed to condemn certain actions, as long as they are sanctioned by the culture in which they take place (Ex. We cannot condemn Nazi Germany) - It does not make sense that morality of a culture can be based off taking a poll of the society--it's too subject to change - What is culture, technically? And subcultures within societies? No delineation - Counteracts what we see historically as colonialism o The idea that tolerance is a good thing is good. In the past, we've seen out viewpoint as correct, and their's as wrong. o Cultural relativism is extreme tolerance. o We cannot condemn an intolerant culture because of our own tolerances, therefore allowing acts against humanity to continue. - When one culture is integrated in another, the culture 6. What is nonobjectivism? - There are no moral facts, only claims - Truths must be discoverable though reason or through experience 7. What is the difference between cognitivism and noncognitivism? - Cognitivism: Moral statement just present propositions, and all are false, there are no true moral statements - Noncognitivism: Moral statements cannot be evaluated by truth, they just express opinions; not true or false
8. What is simple subjectivism? Provide illustrations. - Claiming your own state of mind, making a subjective evaluation - I believe murder is wrong just booing on murder, not proposing any type of morality 9. What is the moral disagreement objection to simple subjectivism? - We want to assume that is it possible for people, when arguing against each-- saying things in conflict with each other, making opposing points. - This does not make a point, but just claims one particular person's belief 10. What does the emotivist believe about moral claims/beliefs? Provide illustrations. - I like ice cream and you should too - Persuasion, pushing opinions on others 11. Be able to explain the difference between emotivism and simple subjectivism. - Simple subjectivism only discusses whether you approve or disapprove - Emotivism brings emotions and proposals into the argument 12. How does emotivism avoid the moral disagreement objection to simple subjectivism? - Avoids the argument by addressing the main point to the disagreement to simple subjectivism by 13. What is the Frege/Geach problem for emotivism? 1. If p, then q. 2. p 3. Therefore, q. Creates a moral fact in emotions, but it is stagnate, because it is personal. We want to assume that it is possible when arguing about morality, to actually be arguing against each other. Saying things in conflict with each other, making opposing points
14. What is moral realism? - There are moral facts - Moral claim have truth value, can be true or false o Any statement with moral fact has truth 15. Supposing you are a moral realist, what is it to believe naturalism about ethics? - Moral properties can be explained by natural properties (science). - There are natural laws of morality 16. Explain Moore's open-question argument against naturalism. - Naturalism: view that scientific method is the only way to evaluate - Moore's open question: He thinks that our moral intution intuits facts that are not natural - Disagrees with naturalism, we know things through intuitions - If you pick any natural property, it will always be an open question, whether instances of that property are good or bad. - If something is pleasurable, is it also good?
17. What is Frege's response to Moore's open-question argument? - You can coherently and non-trivially whether x=y even if x and y refer to the same thing; the sense of good and pleasure may be different, even though they refer to the same class of things o Planet Venus: morning star and evening star. They are describing the same thing.
Normative ethics 1. Explain the ethical egoist's conception of morality. - Not only should I act in my own interests, but you should all act in my interests - Allows you to help others, as long as your forwarding your own long term selfinterest 2. What is the difference between psychological egoism and ethical egoism? - Psychological egoism: Descriptive of how people actually make moral decisions; observing what you is selfish - Ethical egoism: normative, Ought implies Can 3. Somebody is drowning in a pool and an egoist is the closest person, strolling by. Other people are present. How might the egoist justify helping the drowning person? - The egoist would help the drowning person with the reasoning that the other people watching would see him as a savior, and a really good person, and his appearance would be boosted. 4. Explain Mill's Utilitarian view of what makes an action right or wrong? - An action is right if it creates a greater net happiness - greatest utility utility: happiness 5. What is happiness, according to Mill? - Happiness is pleasure - Unhappiness is pain - Greatest Happiness Principle: The ultimate end in morality is the greatest balance of pleasure over pain for all the conscious agents 6. Better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a pig satisfied explain. - Socrates is a conscious agent in the world, he understand things that the pig ca never understand and can fix the ace that he is dissatisfied 7. Setting aside the footnote on page 18, what is Mill's view on motivation? - Motivation does not matter, only the outcome - If I go in a burning building to save someone, trip, and burn both myself and the person, the outcome is not happy, and therefore immorally wrong - The intentions do not matter
8. Explain Robert Nozick's experience machine thought experiment what is it supposed to show? - Having the option to plug into a machine that produces constant pleasure for an hour, most would say yes. Given the chance to plug into it for a lifetime, however, most would say no. Mill claims that you should plug into it for a lifetime because of the net happiness it creates, but most people value experience more than just pleasure. 9. What is negative responsibility and why does Bernard Williams think it is a problem for utilitarianism? Provide an illustration. - If you fail to do something, there will be negative consequences. - In utilitarianism, you are still morally responsible for the outcome of failing to act as well as what happens when you do act. - Ex. You have the option of shooting one innocent person yourself, or not doing anything, and they will shoot 20 other people. You are still responsible for the deaths of 20 other people. 10. What is Kant's distinction between analytic / synthetic statements? - Analytic: All bachelors are unmarried men a statement does that not tell something new, true by definition - Synthetic: That cat is Grandma's favorite cat. can be tested or proved wrong, not a definition that must be accepted 11. What is Kant's distinction between a priori / a posteriori statements? A priori: you know these moral facts before, you s A posteriori: after experience You can't know something wrong through experience or seeing it, just by witnessing murder
12. For Kant, which category do moral truths fit in? - Moral truths fit into the a priori category 13. What is Kant's shopkeeper example? What is it supposed to illustrate? - Shopkeeper overcharges a kid buying candy, because he's in bad mood and wants to be greedy - If you are not doing something for the right reason, then the action is not morally worthy. - The intentions result in selfishness 14. What is the difference between theoretical reason and practical reason? - Theoretical: Logical or deductive thought - Practical: Deciding how to act 15. What is a hypothetical imperative? What is a categorical imperative? - Hypothetical Imperative: imperative dependent upon desires or ends you have o Ex. I want the TA's help, so I'm going to the TA office hours. o If I do not want that help, then I have no imperative to go to those office house - Categorical Imperative: imperative that is not conditional upon goals that you have, but absolute necessities, a requirement o Ex. I have to eat to survive, and in order to eat, I have to go to the kitchen, so I have the categorical imperative to go to the kitchen.
16. What is the universal law formulation of Kant's categorical imperative? - Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. - Act only the way you would apply to a universal law, you only do something that will apply to everyone - I go to office hours for help, everyone must go to office hours for help, because it is absolute. 17. How would Kant go about analyzing a situation in which one is considering cheating on an exam? - The motive is selfish - It is immoral because the incentive is not going to help others 18. What is Kant's view about the amoralist? - It is impossible for an amoralist to exist because if someone grasps a moral truth, then he must be motivated to follow them - Anyone who acknowledges moral truths is rational 19. What is the moral status of animals, according to Kant? Morality only governs rational creatures Morality only commands us respect to rational creatures Animals are not rational to him because they cannot set and achieve goals Animals are not governed by morality, but we still cannot torture them
20. Some object that the categorical imperative rules out too much. Provide a case designed to show this. (Feel free to use the loan decision example used in lecture). - If it rules out too much, calling some maxims immoral even they are not - If it rules out too much, calling some maxims immoral even if they aren't - Imagine at the Lakers game, and you don't want to be stuck in traffic, so you leave the game early [Maxim: Leave early to avoid traffic] - But everyone who wants to avoid traffic is going to leave early, and then there would be traffic anyway - Leaving the Lakers game is therefore, immoral because it is violating the object--this contradiction is therefore immoral 21. What is a Hobbesian state of nature? According to Hobbes, how do we avoid this state? - State of Nature: No moral facts, no God, chaos, humans doing anything they like, idyllic state of nature - Once there is competition for resources, then people fight - Three reasons to fight: for resources, fend others away from resources, for fun 22. In general, what is the social contract theory account of morality? How do animals fit in? - We naturally give up freedoms to murder and steal in order to create order among ourselves - Animals do not apply, but we can't torture them
23. How might a social contract theorist respond to the objection that there was never an actual contract signed by our ancestors? - Hobbes recognized this point - Even if there was no material contract, we still reap the benefits of our society by abiding by the social contract theory and rules, and therefore should abide by it anyway. 24. What is distinctive about virtue ethics? - Concerned with people, not actions - More of a personable thing - Emphasizes character, not so much rules like Mill 25. Describe a case that favors the virtue ethics approach over some of the rule-based theories (like those of Mill and Kant). - Visiting someone who you hit with your car, not because of guidelines, but in order to build character 26. What is Aristotle's doctrine of the mean? Provide an example. - You don't want to be too frank, but you don't want to lie all the time. - Balancing honesty and dishonesty
Applied ethics 1. What is the pro-life argument that fetuses are persons? What is Thomson's response? - A fetus is a living being upon conception - A living being is a human - Thomson's response: Even a human being does not have the right to invade on another human's personal being 2. What is the pro-life argument that abortions are morally impermissible? - A fetus, as a human, as the right to life as important as an adult's. - A right to life is a right to not be killed unjustly, and an abortion would be killing the fetus. - Killing unjustly is morally impermissible. 3. Explain Judy Thomson's violinist case. What is it supposed to show? - Say a violinist kidnaps you and has you plugged into him because he needs the use of your kidneys for the next nine months. You do not have the obligation to remain attached to him for that extensive time period. However, she argues that if it were a smaller time period, such as only one hour, a decent Samaritan would remain attached to that person for the full hour. 4. For Thomson, what is the difference between a Good Samaritan and a Minimally Decent Samaritan? What does Thomson say about Kitty Genovese? - The Good Samaritan: One person gets incredibly beat up and is lying in the middle of the street. This person would go down and help him up, and then continue to nurse his wounds or take him to the hospital and go over the top to save him - The Minimally Decent Samaritan: Stops to check if the person is ok. Maybe calls a cab to help him go somewhere else. - Not even decent: People who just walk by without doing anything
-
Kitty Genovese o Around 40 people saw/ heard he being raped and killed and no one tried to save her or even to call the cops o These people are not even minimally decent, but are still not held legally culpable for what happened to her o In relation to abortion: It would be decent to keep the fetus and continue to provide for it, but a person is not required to do so. o Ought does not imply rights
5. What are Peter Singer's two assumptions for his argument? Provide and motivate an example of the second assumption (what we called the prevention principle in class). - Suffering, death, poverty are all bad situations - Prevention principle: If you can do something to alleviate pain or harm without sacrificing anything morally significant in comparison, then it is the moral thing to do. 6. What is Singer's argument that we ought to offer aid to those who are suffering? - We ought to offer aid to those who are suffering because it does not make us sacrifice anything comparable 7. What does Singer say about the distinction between duty and charity as applied to global aid? - There is not a very clear distinction between duties and charities because it is our duty to contribute to charitable causes whenever we are able to do so.