Moral Theory Day 3
Moral Theory Day 3
Utilitarianism and John Mill -
Morality is determined solely by its consequences
The utility of the result is the sole factor in judging the morality of the action
Not the individual’s happiness that matters but the happiness of the entire community of “sentient beings” which are defined as anything that can feel pleasure and pain.
Greatest Happiness Principle
“Actions are right in the proportion that the tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure.”(47a) – Mill
ex. Pg. 23
Mill’s distinction between the quality and the quantity of pleasure
“Few human creatures would consent to be changed into any of the lower animals, for a promise of the fullest allowance of a beast’s pleasures; no intelligent human being would consent to be a fool, no instructed person would be an ignoramus, no person of feeling and conscience would be selfish and base, even though they should be persuaded that the fool, the dunce, or the rascal is better satisfied with his lot than they are with theirs…It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates sdissatisfied thana fool satisfied.”( 48a)
Strengths:
Practical and can be applied cross culturally
“it challenges us to rethink our traditional notions about moral community. If we are going to exclude or marginalize people or other animals, we have to offer a ratinal justification for our decision.”(22)
Discussion questions
Are there other desirable goals in life besides pleasure?
Do you agree with Mill that intellectual pleasures have greater moral value than physical base animalistic ones?
W.D Ross’s Seven Prima Facie Duties
p. 27
Discussion Question:
If we are able to agree universally on these does that mean that we will agree on everything?
Kant and the Categorical Imperitive
We talked last time abut universal laws and the question that remained from that discussion was ‘how do we agree upon these natural universal laws when there are literally thousands of different interpretations as to what they are?’ Kant provides a litmus test for the ‘natural law’ and surprise surprise the tool that is needed to motor the equation is reason.
Universal morals and the Golden Rule
Categorical Imperitive – Act only on that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.
The Good Will – what matters is intentions not outcomes
Deontology – Duty, or doing what is right for its own sake, is the foundation of morality.
Beneficience – the duty to do good acts and to promote happiness
“To be beneficent when we can is a duty; and besides this, there are many minds so sympathetically constituted that, without any other motive of vanity or self-interest, they find a pleasure in spreading joy around them, and can take delight in the satisfaction of others so far as it is their own work.”(51b)
Reason is what the tool for determining whether something is moral
“The preeminent good which we call moral can therefore consist in nothing else than the conception of law in itself, which certainly is only possible in a rational being…”(52a)
Examples –
Do not lie, and kissing
Discussion Question?
What is wrong with this? If nothing, why don’t we use it?
Utilitarianism and John Mill -
Morality is determined solely by its consequences
The utility of the result is the sole factor in judging the morality of the action
Not the individual’s happiness that matters but the happiness of the entire community of “sentient beings” which are defined as anything that can feel pleasure and pain.
Greatest Happiness Principle
“Actions are right in the proportion that the tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure.”(47a) – Mill
ex. Pg. 23
Mill’s distinction between the quality and the quantity of pleasure
“Few human creatures would consent to be changed into any of the lower animals, for a promise of the fullest allowance of a beast’s pleasures; no intelligent human being would consent to be a fool, no instructed person would be an ignoramus, no person of feeling and conscience would be selfish and base, even though they should be persuaded that the fool, the dunce, or the rascal is better satisfied with his lot than they are with theirs…It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates sdissatisfied thana fool satisfied.”( 48a)
Strengths:
Practical and can be applied cross culturally
“it challenges us to rethink our traditional notions about moral community. If we are going to exclude or marginalize people or other animals, we have to offer a ratinal justification for our decision.”(22)
Discussion questions
Are there other desirable goals in life besides pleasure?
Do you agree with Mill that intellectual pleasures have greater moral value than physical base animalistic ones?
W.D Ross’s Seven Prima Facie Duties
p. 27
Discussion Question:
If we are able to agree universally on these does that mean that we will agree on everything?
Kant and the Categorical Imperitive
We talked last time abut universal laws and the question that remained from that discussion was ‘how do we agree upon these natural universal laws when there are literally thousands of different interpretations as to what they are?’ Kant provides a litmus test for the ‘natural law’ and surprise surprise the tool that is needed to motor the equation is reason.
Universal morals and the Golden Rule
Categorical Imperitive – Act only on that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.
The Good Will – what matters is intentions not outcomes
Deontology – Duty, or doing what is right for its own sake, is the foundation of morality.
Beneficience – the duty to do good acts and to promote happiness
“To be beneficent when we can is a duty; and besides this, there are many minds so sympathetically constituted that, without any other motive of vanity or self-interest, they find a pleasure in spreading joy around them, and can take delight in the satisfaction of others so far as it is their own work.”(51b)
Reason is what the tool for determining whether something is moral
“The preeminent good which we call moral can therefore consist in nothing else than the conception of law in itself, which certainly is only possible in a rational being…”(52a)
Examples –
Do not lie, and kissing
Discussion Question?
What is wrong with this? If nothing, why don’t we use it?
posted by Charles Carlson at
10:27 AM
