Reality and Reason Test 3 Study Guide May 2022
20. What is the difference between a teleological moral theory and a deontological moral theory?
Deontological Moral Theories (after the Greek term deon, meaning "duty" or "requirement"): The rightness of an act is determined not by its consequences, but its form, by the kind of action it is. Deontology is an approach to ethics which adheres to the theory that an end does not justify the means while teleology is an approach to ethics that adheres to the theory that the end always justifies the means.
1. What is the difference between normative ethics, and descriptive ethics?
Descriptive Ethics describes what IS the case. Normative Ethics describes what OUGHT to be the case. (What philosophers specialize in). Descriptive Ethics: Describing the principles that people in fact, do use, to make moral judgments. Sciences like psychology, sociology, and anthropology. Normative Ethics: Normative Ethics: The study of how people SHOULD make ethical decisions, regardless of how they actually make them. An attempt to come up with a theory of what actually makes an act right or wrong. A prescriptive task.
57) Why did Max claim having your data in "the cloud" is a misnomer?
ALL YOUR DATA (PHOTOS, VIDEOS, TWEETS, SOCIAL MEDIA FEEDS, EMAILS, ETC.) IS HOSTED ON THE GROUND IN HUGE DATA CENTERS OWNED BY FOR PROFIT COMPANIES. • WHEN YOU DELETE SOMETHING ONLINE, IS IT REALLY GONE, EVERYWHERE? THERE'S ALWAYS A SCREENSHOT, AND ARCHIVE SERVICES. COMPANIES HAVE BEEN VAGUE ABOUT WHEN THEY ACTUALLY TRULY DELETE ALL INFORMATION, INCLUDING FROM CLOSED ACCOUNTS. • SHOULD ASSUME EVERYTHING YOU HAVE EVER PUT UP IS ACCESSIBLE BY SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE..
68) What were the issues raised at the end of lecture regarding putting existentialism in a larger social context?
Is this a particular individualistic approach to the meaning of life? Why has it been inhabited mainly by white male philosophers, who are the most privileged people and least likely to experience hindrance from others (and perhaps more likely to be focused on individual achievement? Could the meaning of life be to live relationally, connected to others, not taking your individual self as a project in isolation, but as being irrevocably connected to other humans, and a larger non-human, natural world? Was the psychology of hunters and gatherers more "collectivist", seeing the ultimate reality as the larger whole of which each individual was just apart? Does existentialism get off the ground only if you focus on your one life in isolation?
16. What was the main difference between Mill's version of utilitarianism, and Bentham's, and what problems does it generate for Mill?
Both thought that the moral value of an act was determined by the pleasure it produced. Bentham considered only quantity of pleasure, but Mill considered both quantity and quality of pleasure.
5. What is the main objection to using a moral code to decide right from wrong?
Moral codes can offer guidance, but they can't function as full blown theories of what makes an act right or wrong, for they are often too general or specific to solve a moral problem, and they can offer conflicting advice. E.g. what if my parents tell me to steal? What if the only way to save a bunch of people is to kill one?
58) What is Pang's distinction between switch tasking and multi tasking?
Most of what passes for multi-tasking is actually switch-tasking, where you are switching between unrelated tasks. Incredibly inefficient (alphabet/number ex.) Multi-Tasking involves switching between tasks that all work toward one common goal, such as cooking a great multi-course dinner.
65) What was Nietzsche trying to say with his parable of the madman?
Nietzsche creates this parable to present the situation which mankind faces when such advancement is occurring. The madman seeks nothing but the release of truth. In his words, he describes the death of God in detail, and discusses what it means to those in the marketplace around him.
14. What is traditional utilitarianism (act-utilitarianism)?
Traditional utilitarianism ("Act-utilitarianism"): The right action is one that maximizes happiness for everyone affected by the act. Basic intuition: Seek to maximize the total amount of good or happiness in the world (and minimize suffering).
3. What circumstances would make sociobiology more plausible as an approach to moral decisions?
Would also have more force if we could prove humans are happiest and most harmonious when they let their biological instincts guide their life. (So the argument would become, living by the values we have been biologically programmed to hold makes for the best lives). But that is highly debatable and takes a lot of empirical research.
52) What was the point of the slide showing Maslow's hierarchy of needs?
To ask the question if life with technology is better or more fulfilling because we have more technology.
Paradox Objective Time
Has not duration
47) What was the passage from Nietzsche's The Gay Science, about?
"The greatest weight.-- What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: "This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything unutterably small or great in your life will have to return to you, all in the same succession and sequence - even this spider and this moonlight between the trees, and even this moment and I myself. The eternal hourglass of existence is turned upside down again and again, and you with it, speck of dust! "Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus?... Or how well disposed would you have to become to yourself and to life to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal confirmation and seal?"
28.What are the three main principles of a just society Rawls thinks people would agree to when constructing a social contract from behind a veil of ignorance, and what "lexical priority" does he put them in?
1) The principle of equal liberty: Each person has an equal right to the most extensive basic liberties compatible with similar liberties for all. "Lexically prior" to (2) 2) The principle of fair equality of opportunity: Offices and positions are to be open to all under conditions of fair equality and opportunity. "Lexically prior" to (3) 3) The difference principle: Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged persons. To say one principle is lexically prior to another means that all requirements of that principle must be met before any of the requirements of the latter. So wemust ensure that everyone has equal liberty before we ensure they have equal opportunity. And we must ensure they have equal opportunity before we ensure the basic structures maximize the position of the least well off groups
13. What are the two main criticisms we covered regarding considering ethical egoism as a MORAL theory?
As an "ethical" theory it would seem to condone evil acts so long as they are in the egoist's best interest. But that's not what an "ethical" theory is about. You can't preach what you practice. Ethical theories are generally regarded on principles of equality, that equals deserve equal treatment. But it is not in the egoist's interest to try to universalize her theory. The clever egoist will not openly act like one, and will encourage others to act altruistically.
37) How does Nikolai Kuzmich respond to his ever increasing awareness of the passing seconds of his life?
At first Nikolai tries to save time wherever he could ie getting up earlier. Then he eventually gives up, lays on the ground and recites poetry.
60) What was the passage involving a tale of two Mondays about in the reading? (not covered in the lecture)
Based on Miller's own experiences, the play focuses on a group of desperate workers earning their livings in a Brooklyn automobile parts warehouse during the Great Depression in the 1930s, a time of 25 percent unemployment in the United States.
36. Understand the argument for how judging your virtues might collapse virtue ethics back into an ethics of duty.
Because having a virtue just is being disposed to act in a certain way, the only way to determine whether one has a certain virtue is to see how they act. But if all judgments of virtue rest on judgments of action, we can't use virtue to judge the worth of your actions, since we're already determining whether you are virtuous by how you act. But that puts us squarely back in to the realm of judging actions, and whether you are acting on your moral duties. Morality (perhaps) requires virtue. But virtue is judged by actions. So maybe being virtuous and acting out of a sense of duty are two sides of the same coin?
67) What was the difference between the Meaning of Life, capital M, and small m?
Biological, Personal, and Fulfilling life.
25. What is one of the potential problems for Kant's duty based theory of ethics, illustrated by the overcrowded lifeboat example?
But what about those thorny moral dilemmas where it seems we have to consider consequences. Don't we have to sometimes treat people as means to end, to avoid the greater evil? If the evil to be avoided is great enough, perhaps no duty is absolutely inviolable. Utilitarianism is concerned for providing for the common good, but it doesn't respect individual rights. Kant's categorical imperative respects individual rights but is not concerned with providing for the common good.
24. What objections to a consequentialist based theory of morality can a duty based theory of morality overcome?
Consequentialism seems to give you the moral obligation to actively make this the best possible world. A "good" person actively promotes good. • Rights based theories mostly tell you what is OK todo, what is morally permissible. (Though they can also include obligations, such as the moral duty to provide for your children) A "good" person respects other's rights and fulfills their duties, whether or not the world becomes a better place. Isn't it possible that some people would be willing to have everyone act on certain principles that are clearly wrong? E.g., only men should ever be allowed to be President. • Are there really any "perfect duties", ones that admit of no exceptions? You may break a promise to meet a friend to stop and assist at a roadside accident. You may feel that killing one innocent person if it saves the lives of many more innocent people is justified.
10. What is one possible way to resolve the problem presented by cultural relativism?
Cultural practices are not the same thing as moral judgments. We need to understand the larger context within which these practices occur. Cross-cultural (or even the same culture) moral disagreement may lie not in moral principles, but in what are taken to be the particular facts that generate any given moral judgment. The "logical structure of moral judgments"(perhaps): Moral standard + Factual Beliefs = Moral Judgment. The "logical structure of moral judgments" (perhaps): Moral standard + Factual Beliefs = Moral Judgment. Perhaps everyone believes equals should be treated equally, but we disagree on what constitutes being equal. What differs are our views about the nature of reality, not the nature of morality. Take, for example, the abortion debate and "pro-choice" vs."pro-life". Both groups believe murdering an innocent person is wrong. That would be the universal "moral standard". But disagree on the "facts"—at what point does a fertilized egg, then a developing fetus, become a "person"?
40) What paradox does thinking about the present generate when you approach it from the perspective of objective time?
Did it have a beginning? Can we talk about the time before the Big Bang? Is it an abstract entity (like a number, perhaps?), or just matter-in-motion? Does it make sense to talk of a Being existing "before" or "outside" of time? Can objective time have an end? (If the universe ended, would objective time end?) If the past no longer exists, and the future hasn't happened yet, isn't the only "real" time the present? Isn't it always "now"? But how do you define that "moment"? Is it a duration-less point? A timeless boundary between the past and the future? Not a part of time itself, but a boundary? Then we seem to have a paradox, for there is no present, even though the present is all there is, objectively speaking. In a way, all statements of fact about when something happened are false, since time never stops, and event sunfold, are always happening in the flow of time. If there were no matter in motion, would it make sense to even talk about(objective) time?
6. Know the major philosophical objections to relying on Divine Command Theory.
Divine Command Theory: Morally right actions are those decreed by God. What makes an action right is that God approves of it. God created morality. No God, no moral truths. Complications: Would seem to imply that morality has an inescapable arbitrary element to it. If God had decreed that murder was OK, then would it be? On the other hand, if murder is wrong regardless of what God says, then God must not be the ultimate creator of morality (though he may be the ultimate enforcer). Assumes there is a God. But Which God? Which Religion? Still leaves us the task of figuring out what God decrees. How can you know? How do we settle disagreements? For that it seems we need an additional theory telling us how to figure it out (or we need to use our own moral reasoning, so we're back to where we started). Even if there is no God, isn't murder still wrong? Would imply morality ultimately does not rest on there being a supernatural being.
38) How does Pablo Ibbieta respond to being spared execution, and why do you think he responds this way?
He starts laughing because even though he was going to die for lying he told them that Gris was in the cemetery when he knew he wasn't then they ended up finding Gris in the cemetery.
4. Explain emotivism, and the theory of meaning that generated it. What are the standard criticisms of this theory?
Emotivism: The doctrine that moral utterances are simply expressions of emotions, and have no truth value, for they are not making any real claims about the world. For example, saying cheating on a test is wrong is actually equivalent to saying, "Cheating? Boo!! Criticisms: Emotivism can't account for any real moral disagreements, which fly in the face of commonsense. Saying Hitler was wrong to murder 6 million Jews means more than simply saying, "Hitler—boo!!" • If Emotivism is correct, then we can't condemn something like torturing innocent children as genuinely wrong. But it is, right? • Common sense can be wrong (turns out the earth isn't flat), but you need good reasons to reject them. Emotivism does not offer any.
32. What distinguishes an Ethics of Care from all the other moral theories we examined?
Ethics of care is a feminist approach to ethics. It challenges traditional moral theories as male-centric and problematic to the extent they omit or downplay values and virtues usually culturally associated with women or with roles that are often cast as 'feminine'
19. What problem is Nozick's "Experience Machine" thought experiment supposed to expose about utilitarianism?
Even if happiness is an intrinsic good, is it the only intrinsic good? Should an ethical theory be solely concerned with promoting "happiness"? refutes the claim of many Utilitarians by saying that life is not all about getting the most pleasure or utility out of something, but rather about being able to actually live one's life and experience everything for oneself.
44) What is Sartre's famous existential dictum, and what does it mean?
Existence precedes essence. Sartre's famous dictum. There is only the present moment, and how you will respond to it. You are not bound by past conditioning, or "human nature" a personality is not built over a previously designed model or a precise purpose, because it is the human being who chooses to engage in such enterprise.
23. What are Kant's two formulations of the categorial imperative?
First Formulation: Formulation one: An action is right if it meets two conditions, universalizability and reversibility. Unverbalizable: Everyone can act on the principle. (e.g. can't universalize a principle such as, "borrow money on the basis of a false promise whenever you need it.") Reversible: You would be willing to have everyone act on it. (similar to the "golden rule"—do unto others as you would have them do unto you. ) Second Formulation: Formulation two: An action if right if it treats people as ends in themselves and not merely as means to an end. Kant: "Act in such a way that you always treat humanity...never simply as a means, but always at the a me time as an end." Categorical imperative, version two: An action is right if it treats people as ends in themselves and not merely as means to an end. To treat people as "ends in themselves" is to treat them as being intrinsically valuable, that is, valuable for their own sakes, verses instrumentally valuable, value for the sake of something else.
48) What did Max mean by saying "humans have a history because of technology"?
Genetically we are little or no different than our hunting and gathering ancestors. We left the Savannah yesterday on an evolutionary timeframe. Animals have no "history" in the sense that humans do. They adapt to their environment, or parish. Looked at one way, the story of humanity just is the story of changing our environment, which is the story of technology. Everything humans have ever made, from the first sharpened stone tool or animal skin clothing, is "technology". We are a unique species in that our story involves continually inventing technology to facilitate our interaction with our environment. TECHNOLOGY ISWHAT ENABLEDHUMANS TOSPREAD TO EVERYCONTINENT EXCEPTANTARCTICA
63) Why does Camus think Sisyphus is the absurd hero?
Humans want Meaning. They can't help but quest for it. The universe will never grant it. That is ABSURD. Life is repetition with no ultimate meaning, and no lasting results. We are all Sisyphus, rolling our rock up the hill. "Sisyphus, proletarian of the gods, powerless and rebellious ,knows the whole extent of his wretched condition: it is what he thinks of during his descent. The lucidity that was to constitute his torture at the same time crowns his victory. There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn."• "I leave Sisyphus at the foot of the mountain! One always finds one's burden again. But Sisyphus teaches the higher fidelity that negates the gods and raises rocks. He too concludes that all is well. The universe henceforth without a master seems to him neither sterile nor futile. Each atom of that stone, each mineral flake of that night-filled mountain, in itself forms a world. The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy."
21. What is the difference between a categorical and hypothetical imperative?
Hypothetical imperatives demand you do certain things only if there is a certain end or goal you desire. For example, if you want to be a good student, study diligently. A categorical imperative is one that must be obeyed under any circumstances.
35. What problems do we run into when we try to apply the concept of being a virtuous person to Utilitarianism or Kantianism?
In obeying the categorical imperative, Kantianism requires us to always act out of a sense of duty. But that isn't always enough. A virtuous person will perform their duties, but not simply out of a sense of duty, but also for reasons of love, empathy, and compassion. So mapping Virtue Ethics onto Kantian theories of duty asks too little, or at least ignores the proper motivations. Leading a good life necessitates the development of certain virtues. Morality should focus on developing good character, instead of focusing simply on doing the right thing (though "good people" would want to do the right thing!). In virtue ethics, the concept of a good person takes precedent over the concept of a right action. The emphasis changes from doing the right thing, to developing one's moral character, to living a virtuous life. For act-utilitarianism, a virtuous person would be one who always tries to maximize happiness. This asks too much. We lose the distinction between doing one's moral duty, and going above and beyond what's required.(If the money I spend on dinner out could have sponsored a child for a month in a poor country, I would seem to be morally obligated to give that money instead to charity, according to utilitarianism.) So can't look to consequentialism for guidance on virtues, as it clashes with our moral intuitions about what a moral life requires. Requires too much self-sacrifice
55) What were some of the results Max reported from running a one week media fast experiment for over 25 years with adult learners?
Increased productivity Better mood-ignorance is a bliss Connect more with family, friends Rediscovered hobbies Pursued creative projects Slept better Had time for reflecting on life goals, the journey we are all on
15. What were some of the metrics Bentham felt should be taken into consideration in employing his "hedonic calculus"?
Intensity, Duration, Probability, Propinquity (nearness in time), Fecundity (probability it will produce more happiness in the future), impurity (probability that it will produce less happiness in the future. The happiness produced by different kinds of actions can differ only indegree, not kind. So happiness derived from graduating with honors is not inherently better than that derived from getting drunk. Let's just measure how much overall happiness might be derived from any particular action.
49) What are some of the things about humans and culture that seem to have led our species to create technology?
It all came from the "naked ape" with our opposable thumbs and cognitive abilities. Our ability to use language and conceptualize, and to communicate so as to work together cooperatively. Our curiosity and creative impulse, and the desire to live more comfortably, or better, or different Our creation of symbol systems to capture meaning and measure the world, including mathematics. Opposable thumbs (and being bipedal). Worldview that the planet is ours to manipulate and control. (Carolyn Merchant—The Death of Nature) Capitalism (reward for innovation)
62) Why did Sartre think the question of God's existence was largely irrelevant to the question of how to live?
Jean Paul Sartre: "Existentialism isn't so atheistic that it wears itself out showing that God doesn't exist. Rather, it declares that even if God did exist, that would change nothing." Translation: God or no God, you still have to decide what to believe, how to live your life, what's true. You can't escape responsibility for your life and choices. You are "condemned" to freedom.
What was the main problem that motivated Rawls to come up with his contractarian approach to ethics?
John Rawls (1921-2002) tries to take the best from teleological and deontological ethics while avoiding their shortcomings by focusing on what would make for the most just society. HOW DO WE PROVIDE FOR THE COMMONGOOD WHILE RESPECTING RIGHTS AND UPHOLDINGOUR DUTIES? (SHIFTING OUR DISCUSSION FROM FOCUSING ON WHAT MAKES AND ACT RIGHT TO A WHAT MAKES A SOCIETY JUST) There are not enough goods—jobs, food, housing, medical care, educational opportunity, etc—to go around.• Given the scarcity of goods, what is the fairest arrangement?
43) Why does Max claim "all photos are false"?
Life is never paused We live our lives in moments, but these moments are never static, no matter how brief, they are happening in the flow of time.
45) Know the basic idea behind the three ways of understanding time-- Linear, Multi-Active, and Cyclical, grounding them with examples from various cultures. What sorts of issues might these different conceptions of time generate when people from different cultures interact. Be ready to present scenarios involving two different kinds of clashes.
Linear is a line; European/Western Multi-active: It'll happen eventually, don't adhere to schedules, it's about time spent and who you're with; Middle Eastern/Mediterranean Cyclical: time always comes back, you'll have a second chance; Far Eastern
64) Compare and contrast Camus and Nagel's views on what gives rise to the feeling of absurdity in human existence.
Nagel: The clash is not between us and a meaningless world, but between us and any conceivable world that contained us As long as we are human, our questions will always outrun our answers. The essence of the absurdity of our lives lies in "...the collision between the seriousness with which we take our lives and the perpetual possibility of regarding everything about which we are serious as arbitrary, or open to doubt." Camus: Roll your rock defiantly, even joy fully, knowing all along it will rollback down, and your life, in the longest view of things, will ultimately amount to nothing. Humans want Meaning. They can't help but quest for it. The universe will never grant it. That is ABSURD. Life is repetition with no ultimate meaning, and no lasting results. We are all Sisyphus, rolling our rock up the hill.
39) What are the differences between objective time, psychological time, and cyclical time?
Objective Time: regular, and absolutely even• uni-directional (cause and effect goes one direction)• units are arbitrary and indefinitely divisible commonly conceived of as the "fluid medium" through which objects/events occur Relatively new in human history Psychological Time: elastic (can speed up, slow down)—only know this by being able to compare to some outside event in the world that is not elastic. disappears when we are unconscious or in a non-dreaming state of sleep up until the advent of time pieces, was the only kind of time we directly experienced. Could be defined as the individual's experience of the continuum of consciousness. Cyclical Time: How ancient people experienced time. (So, a kind of psychological time?) The experience of time for most of human existence, before there were time pieces and "hours" and "seconds",etc Time is experienced as events that keep coming back and reoccurring. Examples: Moon phases. Seasons. Animal migrations. Planting and Harvest. Tides. Sunrise and sunset. Menstruation. Cycle of life.
8. What is the basic difference between individual and cultural relativism?
One, called individual relativism, is the view that each person creates his or her own moral standards. The other, called cultural relativism, is the view that societies, not the individual person, creates moral standards which are then authoritative over everyone within that society.
56) What are some of the issues raised by the movie, "The Social Dilemma?"
POWERFUL MEDIA COMPANIES DEVELOP ALGORITHMS THAT SUPPLY YOUR "FEED" WITH THE GOAL OF KEEPING YOU ON THE APP. "ADDICTION" IS THE AIM. WHY? THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS TO MAKE MONEY THROUGH ADVERTISING. YOU ARE THE PRODUCT BEING SOLD. IN A SENSE, THESE COMPANIES ARE NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER COMPANY. THEY ARE "MACHINES" BUILT TO MAXIMIZE PROFIT. N THE END, IT HARDLY MATTERS WHO RUNS THEM. THEIR BEHAVIOR IS DICTATED BY THEIR CORPORATE STRUCTURE AND THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM THEY OPERATE UNDER, NOT THE INDIVIDUALS IN CHARGE. THE COMPANIES' ALGORITHMS ARE NOT MORAL OR IMMORAL, BUT A MORAL. IN THE SERVICE OF CAPITALISM, THE GOAL IS SIMPLE AND TOTALIZING: EVER MORE PROFIT AND GROWTH. TRUTH, A BETTER SOCIETY, MORE CIVIL SOCIAL DISCOURSE,HEALTHIER INDIVIDUALS, SOCIAL JUSTICE ARE NOT THE DIRECT GOALS OF ANY FOR PROFIT MEDIA COMPANY. THEY WILL BE PURSUED ONLY TO THE EXTENT THE IMPROVE THE BOTTOM LINE. LIKE MOST TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENTS, THERE IS LITTLE TO NO PUBLIC DISCUSSION OR DEMOCRATIC CONTROL OF WHAT HAPPENS. THE "BRAVE NEW WORLD" WE FACE HAS NOT BEEN CREATED BY A TOTALITARIAN GOVERNMENT, BUT HUGE, LARGELY UNREGULATEDTECH COMPANIES CONTROLLED BY RELATIVELY FEW PEOPLE, MOSTLY WHITE MEN. (LATEST EXAMPLE—ELON MUSK ACQUIRINGTWITTER)
54) What was "philosophical probe #4" about in the lecture?
Philosophical probe #4: One possible trade-off for entertaining yourself to death Wisdom, reflection and life lessons cannot be rushed, are not contained in some app or YouTube video. They take down time, processing time, not having our consciousness always on the surface with media stimulation. How often are you alone with yourself? As a species, and as individuals, we can have access to evermore information, yet be increasingly shallow people.
9. What are some of the possible "virtues" of cultural relativism? What is the main drawback?
Promotes tolerance and acceptance of differences, leading to more empathy and compassion. Diffuses belief in the superiority of one's way of doing things. Counteracts simple dualistic thinking, us vs. them. Good antidote to ethnocentrism. Encourages us to try to understand a culture's beliefs and practices from within that culture's point of view. Would seem to deny universal moral truths. Isn't sex trafficking of children wrong, no matter what? Isn't female genital surgery wrong, no matter what? (We may in fact find some universally held values around the world, but Cultural Relativism would say that proves nothing.) • What about the notion of universal human rights? • How can we claim the world has made moral progress, in things like outlawing slavery, giving women the right to vote, protecting workers, etc., if we think morals are just relative to a culture?
11. What is the difference between psychological egoism (hedonism) and ethical egoism?
Psychological egoism (hedonism): We can't help but act in our own self-interest. To act voluntarily, to act on a desire, just is to act in our own self-interest. We can't help but be "selfish". If psychological egoism is true, then we might as well all adopt ethical egoism, because a moral theory should only ask us what's possible. Ethical Egoism: Whose happiness or pleasure should we try to maximize? Ethical egoism says just your own. What makes an action right for an ethical egoist is that it promotes one's own best interests. Ethical egoists need not all agree on what their best interest is. For some, it might be a pleasure, pure and simple(hedonism). For others, it might be knowledge, power, or self-realization.
27. What was Rawls' "veil of ignorance" thought experiment, and what was it designed to show?
Rawls suggests that you imagine yourself in an original position behind a veil of ignorance. Behind this veil, you know nothing of yourself and your natural abilities, or your position in society. You know nothing of your sex, race, nationality, or individual tastes. Behind a veil of ignorance, any rational and self-interested person will only agree to a contract that protects the least among society, and discriminates against no particular group.
26. What was the thought experiment Rawls used before generalizing it to the "veil of ignorance" experiment, to ensure fair distribution of goods?
Rawls: "The principles of justice for the basic structure of society are the principles that free and rational persons...would accept in an initial situation of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association." So, thought experiment: Suppose six hungry people have equal claim to a slice of an uncut pie. We'll draw straws for who gets to do the slicing. How do we ensure fairness? Simple: Make the person cutting get the last choice. Can we generalize this method to distributing goods in society in general?
30. What was Gilligan's critique of Kohlberg's research on the stages of moral development?
Results of Gilligan's research: When faced with moral decisions or dilemmas, men tend to think about rights and responsibilities. Women tend to think about compassion and care, about who is involved. Men want justice to be served, women care more about preserving and nurturing relationships (though not at the expense of justice). Some later studies claimed to find little difference between the sexes in moral reasoning if age differences and educational levels are taken into account. So the jury is still out on Gilligan's original empirical claim about the sexes engaging in moral reasoning differently (and if so, what the causes are). But, an ethics of care may still be an important piece to add to moral reasoning, regardless of whether it breaks down along gender lines.
18. What is rule-utilitarianism, and why is it generally not considered a satisfactory alternative to act utilitarianism?
Rule-utilitarianism: An act is right if it follows a rule that, if generally followed, would maximize happiness, everyone considered. But once we start down this path, we eventually collapse back into act utilitarianism. Where do we draw the line with exceptions? And still, there is nothing in the theory inherently committed to rights, duties, justice.
31. What was the central empirical claim of Gilligan's regarding gender differences in moral decision making?
Some later studies claimed to find little difference between the sexes in moral reasoning if age differences and educational level sare taken into account. So the jury is still out on Gilligan's original empirical claim about the sexes engaging in moral reasoning differently (and if so, what the causes are).
61) What is the Extended Mind Thesis?
The extended mind thesis (EMT) claims that our mind and associated cognitive processes are neither skull-bound nor even body-bound, but extend into the surrounding environment via objects and technologies that help us negotiate reality. the cognitive processes that make up the human mind can reach beyond the boundaries of individual to include as proper parts aspects of the individual's physical and sociocultural environment.
2. Explain sociobiology's approach to normative ethics, and be able to describe the fallacy most philosophers believe it commits.
The key idea of sociobiology: Natural selection has determined what kind of social behavior has survival for the species, or at least your clan or tribe. E.O Wilson (one of the founders of sociobiology): "The empiricist argument holds that if we explore the biological roots of moral behavior, and explain their material origins and biases, we should be able to fashion a wise and enduring ethical consensus." Critique: Assumption behind sociobiology's view on normative ethics: An understanding of why people do in fact behave the way they do yields a theory about how they SHOULD behave. This commits the naturalistic fallacy, which is to assume we can derive and OUGHTfrom and IS. Just because something is the case doesn't mean it should be the case. The sociobiology argument might have more force if we were bound by our biology and couldn't do otherwise. But the history of moral progress would indicate that's not true. We have eliminated slavery, forexample.•
59) What is Pang's concept of the monkey mind?
The monkey mind leaps about and never stays in one place, it is undisciplined and jittery. It flits about, "attracted to today's infinite and ever-changing buffet of information choices and devices. It thrives on overload, is drawn to shiny and blinky things, and doesn't distinguish between good and bad technologies or choices."
46) What makes the Malagasy experience of time different from all the others we discussed?
The-Bus-Would-Leave-When-Its-Full
33. What is one possible philosophical response to the question of why we can't all agree on a theory about the right way to do ethics?
This is just the latest instance of a philosophical problem we've covered in class on which there is no universal agreement. This is the nature of philosophical inquiry. The questions that continue to be the domain of philosophers remain unsettled and complex(It's not rocket science, it's harder—it's philosophy). Regarding this particular problem—ethics—Perhaps our moral life is too complex for any one theory to capture all situations. Sometimes rights matter most; sometimes the common good. Sometimes justice. Sometimes care. That may be a virtue, not a weakness of how we do ethics Why we can't agree on the answers to philosophical problems is itself an interesting philosophical question. One we won't explore, but I encourage you to mull over.
53) What did Max mean by making the claim that this could also be characterized as the age of missing information?
This is not (just) the information age. It's the age of missing information. Do you know how to grow food? Read the weather? Sew your own clothes? Recognize the flora and fauna in your region? Our ancestors knew tons of things we have lost. What kinds of knowledge are most worth having? Potential Irony: The technological fruits of our collective genius are dumbing us down Most information you will never "know". Of the tiny amount of stuff you can know, what is most worth knowing to "self-actualize"?
22. Describe the two thought experiments that lead to Kant's first formulation of the categorical imperative.
Thought experiment 1: To determine whether a particular action is moral, imagine what the world would be like if everyone acted on that principle. If such a world is conceivable, and you would be willing to live in it, then it is morally permissible to act on that principle. (This is universalizability) Thought experiment 2: Put yourself in the other person's shoes and decide whether you would let them do to you what you are about to do to them. If not, refrain from performing the action. (This is reversibility)—like the golden rule, except focuses on the principle in question, not the people involved. An action is right if it meets two conditions, universalizability and reversibility.
29. What basic fact about how we make moral judgments in every day life do all the theories considered so far seem to ignore?
Utilitarian and Kantian approaches to ethics both emphasize impartiality in cranking out moral decisions, making them blind to any special obligations to caring relationships. Rawls' Veil of Ignorance makes the same assumptions. Shouldn't we prioritize family and loved ones in our moral lives? Don't parents have special obligations to their children over obligations to others, in addition to maximizing the general good or carrying out their duties to society in general? Isn't going for total impartiality, wrong?
34. How does virtue ethics change the focus in discussions about morality?
Virtue ethics focuses on what it is to lead a good life, instead of what it is to do the right thing. We need morality because if there were no constraints on our behavior, life might be "nasty, brutish, and short." (Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, 1668.) It is in everyone's interest to cooperate with others and have mutual constraints on pursuing one's self-interest. One way to get people to act morally is through threats of punishment. But a better way is to cultivate their moral sentiments so that they "police" themselves.
41) What is Williams James' solution for using psychological time to get out of that paradox talked about in the previous question?
Way out of paradox? William James (a pragmatist!): "The present" is a psychological event, rather than a mathematical or real event. And it has a duration. If we define time as the experience of the duration of our consciousness, then "the present" is just the perceptual time-span of that duration How long the "present" moment lasts depends in part on the sensory stimuli that are perceived as a unitary event. Rarely longer than 5 seconds, often less than .5 seconds
7. What are some of the "bizarre consequences" of Individual Relativism?
You can never be wrong, (assuming you fully know the situation and have thought it through). You are morally infallible by definition. You make an action right (for you) simply by agreeing with it. Moral disagreement is reduced to persuasion and matters of opinion, nothing objective. Most importantly, if taken to its logical conclusion, it leads to judgments no one would accept. E.g. If Hitler thought that murdering Jews was right, then for him it was right.
51) Understand the idea that technology does not give you more choices, just different choices.
You can't live in a world with no cars (and all that implies). You can't live in a world where a grade school education is enough. You can't live in a world without time pieces. You can't live in a world free of the threat of nuclear annihilation. You can't live in a world where the only way to communicate is face-to-face. You can't live in a world free of toxic chemicals.• You can't live in a world free of social media. You can't live in a world where you never saw an image of yourself (or anyone else). You can't live in a world where you only know what's going on in your immediate neighborhood.
50) What did Max mean in claiming that the "advance" of technology is not a democratic process?
You may experience technology as some abstract force, because over 99% of humans have no say, no involvement, in the "advance" of technology. You expect things to keep changing, the world to keep "advancing".
66) What was the point of the Bertrand Russell reading "It was a good Play" from A Free Man's Religion?
Your Purpose (Meaning, capital M) may not involve Immortality Why assume God & goodness & your mattering & immortality all go together?
17. What are some of the main problems for utilitarianism in general, as illustrated by the thought experiments from the textbook covered in the lecture slideshow?
it fails to take into account considerations of justice. We can imagine instances where a certain course of action would produce great benefits for society, but they would be clearly unjust. We will punish you for your crime only if it maximizes utility? Or we will punish the innocent if it maximizes happiness. What about the law being impartial, about treating equals equally
42) Be able to recognize text and its meaning from the transcript for Zenosyne.
t's actually just after you're born that life flashes before your eyes. Entire a eons are lived in those first few months when you feel inseparable from the world itself, with nothing to do but watch it passing by. At first, time is only felt vicariously, as something that happens to other people. You get used to living in the moment, because there's nowhere else to go. But soon enough, life begins to move, and you learn to move with it. And you take it for granted that you're a different person every year, Upgraded with a different body...a different future. You run around so fast, the world around you seems to stand still. Until a summer vacation can stretch on for an eternity. You feel time moving forward, learning its rhythm, but now and then it skips a beat, as if your birthday arrives one day earlier every year. We should consider the idea that youth is not actually wasted on the young. That their dramas are no more grand than they should be. That their emotions make perfect sense, once you adjust for inflation. For someone going through adolescence, life feels epic and tragic simply because it is: every kink in your day could easily warp the arc of your story. Because each year is worth a little less than the last. And with each birthday we circle back, and cross the same point around the sun. We wish each other many happy returns. But soon you feel the circle begin to tighten, and you realize it's a spiral, and you're already halfway through. As more of your day repeats itself, you begin to cast off deadweight, and feel the steady pull toward your center of gravity, the ballast of memories you hold onto, until it all seems to move under its own inertia. So even when you sit still, it feels like you're running somewhere. And even if tomorrow you will run a little faster, and stretch your arms a little farther, you'll still feel the seconds slipping away as you drift around the bend. Life is short. And life is long. But not in that order.
12. How might one respond to the claim we are all hardwired to be egoists?
then we might as well all adopt ethical egoism, because a moral theory should only ask of us what's possible. We couldn't help but be selfish.
