ethics part 2

What was their argument for their position?

Early stoicism Logos creates all things, therefore everything in existence is good

What did Hedonism hold to be synonymous with the good

Pleasure

What modern theory has its roots in this theory, and how does it typically work

Pluralism is the modern of middle skepticism

What school held that the good life, and hence the moral life consisted in the endurance of pain? Name some members of this school.

STOICISM Xeno Marcus Arilius Spock

Given Augustine's definition, what are the two types of evil and what are their definitions?

The privation of some perfection appropriate to the thing 1. Natural evil - privation 2. Moral thing - with knowledge of evil

Did Epicurus think that death was a bad thing? Why or why not?

YES, is the most awful of all the evils BC life is a precondition for all other good things

Does Aquinas think God is the cause of your very act of free choice, or only the cause of the power of free choice?

yes

What was the flaw in Epicurus' argument about death?

"Evil you have to be present" .. thats wrong .. some evil has been deprived

For the Stoics, "to cause" = "to _____________." Explain why they thought this was the case.

determine if logos is the cause .. is also the cause of your free choice therefore your free choice is not really free

How does Augustine define evil?

he says evil is real but not areal thing Privation of some perfection appropriate to the thing

How does Augustine's definition of evil allow him to avoid the contradictions found in Stoicism?

if evil is real but not a real thing A good God creates good things but allows them to existed with less of goodness

Does Augustine agree with the Stoics that God is all good/knowing/powerful and that man is free?

yes

How is Hedonism similar to Epicureanism? How is it different from Epicureanism?

Both think of the good in therm of a physical state Different H - good is a positive physical state ( you seek a good pleasure ) E - good is a negative physical staTe (absence of something) (avoid pain) Anything becomes moral if gives someone pleasure. If my pleasure gives you pain -- should i do it? Hedonism will answer yes bc it gives him pleasure

What is Psychological Hedonism? What does Psychological Hedonism get right? What does it get wrong?

Claim that you do whatever you do for the sake of pleasure (sole motivation is pleasure) right : everything you do has pleasure attached wrong: to claim that is your soul motivation.

Name the school that holds to the dictum "all things in moderation." Name this school's founder.

EPICURUS

In addition to the above three problems, Hedonism was said to share two additional problems with Epicureanism. What are they?

H is ego-centric and atemporalEgo-centric - focused on what you as an individual should doAtemporal - does not take into account future consequeces

If the above position is true, two possible alternatives to a moral science were outlined in class. What were they

Way of toleration- tolerate all possible opinions The way of tyranny- only tolerate one opinion and make everyone believe it (all different opinions on how we should live, and I decide that we are all going to be Buddhists. Why? I have an army and guns so there) Way of toleration will always end in the way of tyranny How to resolve that? by force; cannot offer any reason for doing so

Will this "ultimate good" be the same for everyone, or different? Explain.

Yes is the same in the sense that everyone should try to avoid pain, is But Different because different people will do different things to avoid pain

Did the early members of this school deny the existence of evil as evil?

Yes, they believed there was no evil in the world LOGOS is all-good, when you experience evil, it is really an illusion

Who were the second member(s) of this school and what did he/they hold? Does their position open up the possibility for any sort of science? For a moral science?

2nd member - arcisilus & carniates (middle skeptics) Tried to find a middle ground (some possibilities are more likely than other possibilities) -Probabilistic skepticism Can you have a science for this? - yes, you can make statements of probability

Two problems were identified with this school's position. What are they?

1.Any action becomes good if it helps you avoid pain 2.Implies that the best life is the passive life (when you are doin as little as possible) 3. anything is good if done in moderation

Three theoretical difficulties with Hedonism were discussed in class. List and briefly discuss them.

1.Anything which produces pleasure is good 2.Has no way of resolving competing pleasure claims (if I like it and you don't, how do we go forth?) 3.Hedonist paradox - pursuit of intense pleasure leads to intense pain and the avoidance of pain leads to the avoidance of pleasure

What does this school consider to be the ultimate good? How does the phrase "all things in moderation" relate to the ultimate good?

Absence of pain is ultimate goodPleasure exists at the extremes so if you want to avoid pain, avoid the extremes

If the above position is true, then what is the major consequence for all science?

All science disappear Because all science requires that you can make judgments about how things really are- if that's not possible, no science is possible

Is there a contradiction within this school of thought? If so, what is it?

Is ridiculous to say there is no evil, Yes, they insist that the LOGOS determines every event but then insist that you have free willIf god is determining your act of choice, you are not choosing

Does his/their position hold? Why or why not? What member of this school critiques this position?

NO, it doesn't hold. It is incoherent Probability implies necessity Antiochus ... ( late skepticism )

Did Epicurus think that death was a bad thing for the person who died? Why or why not?

No, bc when death happens, the person isn't there anymoreWe call something evil because there is a logical relation, not necessarily a temporal relation

Does Augustine agree with the Stoics about the existence of evil?

No, early stoics deny evil does not exists, later stoics say that creation is from preexisting stuffAugustine says that evil is real, god creates from nothing

Name the first member of this school we discussed and outline his position

Pyrro of elis -since your sense experience is continuously changing, your knowledge is continuously changing

Name the epistemological theory that claims that no certain knowledge at all is possible

Skepticism