Final. teacher

Final. teacher - Phil Class 24: Nagel- William’s notes...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–5. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Phil Class 24: Nagel- William’s notes that there is a stoic trend in which happiness is the goal of human life.- Happiness is the goal of moral life- For the stoics, the goal of life is to cultivate tranquility, not allow the bad things to affect you in life. Moral Luck ←- Happiness and Luck (the Stoics and Aristotle) • Stoics believe that happiness and tranquility were the goals of life. • We can respond/choose how we will react to something that happens. Reactions make us happy/not • Happiness therefore is also in our control • However, full human happiness is due in part of external goods o Ex: your children turn out bad; resulting in marring your life ← ←- Morality and Luck (Kant and Abelard) • Kant: “ Good will is the only good without limitation” o We as agents are good insofar as we have good will. o For Kant: luck doesn’t attribute anything to moral worth • Abelard once said: “nothing taints the soul but what belongs to it: mainly consent” o We can determine how we’re going to feel o Only the soul is capable of withholding consent.. it’s an intrinsic capacity to do a good/bad thing—this is what affects moral punishment/reward: which makes sense only if attributing wrongdoings are characters of you personally. o Both Williams and Nagel suggests objections to Avilarian’s view. They see moral luck as a real phenomenon- it has real affect on our morals ← ←- Williams’ View (Paul Gauguin Example) • Ex: Paul Gauguin o Suppose that Gauguin leaves his family to go to Tahiti because he feels that he can become a great painter o Success/failure might color the status of his action of leaving his family. o He may have limited control over whether he is successful in Tahiti.. If he becomes a great artist, does his action of leaving his family justifiable? o Things turn out successful by luck- lucky with talent, lucky to get a chance to go to Tahiti o So the justifiable of his action depends on factors that are out of his control. • Ex: Truck Driver o A truck driver runs over a child by accident.. The driver should feel something like regret even thought it isn’t his fault because he was directly involved ( agent regret ) He was a little negligent because he didn’t check his break. BUT suppose the case: he didn’t check his break and didn’t hit the child In this case, he didn’t kill a child by LUCK.. What we might be left with is that we ought to treat all people who don’t check his break as the same as a truck driver who killed a child. Either way we will get rid of moral luck but not satisfactory. In terms of their contribution, the two truck drivers might have done the exactly same thing but the rest is up to moral luck....
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 04/14/2008.

Page1 / 58

Final. teacher - Phil Class 24: Nagel- William’s notes...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 5. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online