Review session[1]

Review session[1] - Thursday Monday MR 22 Justice Katharina Held Review session I Utilitarianism Bentham Human nature Pleasure Happiness Utility

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Thursday, January 15, 2004 MR 22, Justice Monday, January 19, 2004 Katharina Held Review session I Utilitarianism Bentham Human nature „nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure“ Pleasure Happiness Utility Morality „an act is morally right (morally right/just) insofar as its tendency to augment the happiness for the community is greater than its tendency to diminish it“ Hedonic calculus individual, community (cost-benefit-analysis): intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity and extent quantity Majority rule greatest pleasure for the greatest number of people community as a fictious body, constituted by the sum of the indivuduals Mill „Utilitarianism is a doctrine worthy of swine“ Objections to Bentham commensurability, quality instead of quantity, rights Happiness-principle foundation of morals Lower vs. higher pleasures Rights/ Justice norms/rules of justice must be taken into account when gaining happiness rules/moral norms are part of the higher pleasures and felt as morally demanding (superior pleasures) „justice is a name for a certain moral requirement which, regarded collectively, stand higher in the scale of social utility, and are therefore of more paramount obligation“
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
II Libertarianism - Critique of Mill on Bentahm still stands: what about rights? - Liberalism, liberal libertarianism, liberal egalitarianism - Right to Liberty and self-ownership - Nozick: government minimal- state / night-watchman-state (against paternalism, for protection) taxation on par with forced labor property principles of a) justice in acquisition b) justice in transfer c) rectification of injustice distribution no patterned system of distribution patterning: everyone according to his needs/merits distribution according to principles of justice entitlement-theory (merit vs. entitlement) - Friedmans equality before God, equality of opportunity, equality of outcome (historical) - Hayek inequality as a fact of nature: beyond human control, so why should humans ‚pay‘ for it? unequal distributions are therefore not unjust equality of opportunity: only individual abilities count as a means for outcome against fair shares for all, against egalitarianism III Locke, Second Treatise - legitimate government contract with explicit consent, and serving specific ends government, which doesn‘t serve specific ends, cannot be considered legitimate - origin of governm. state of nature (hypothetical/ origin story) state of perfect freedom and equality, all men are workmanship of omnipotent creature (God)
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/07/2008 for the course MORAL REAS 22 taught by Professor Sandel during the Fall '05 term at Harvard.

Page1 / 7

Review session[1] - Thursday Monday MR 22 Justice Katharina Held Review session I Utilitarianism Bentham Human nature Pleasure Happiness Utility

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

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