Ethics Exam 1

objective moral standards

those moral requirements that apply to people regardless of their opinions about such duties, and independently of whether fulfilling such duties will satisfy any of their desires

intrinsic value

those things that are good in and of themselves considered entirely apart from any good results they may cause. it is controversial which things are considered this, but happiness, desire satisfaction, virtue, and knowledge are frequently mentioned candidates

instrumental goods

those things whose value consists in the fact that they help to bring about other good things. examples include vaccinations, mothballs, and money

the fact that the vast majority of girls do not have a choice is the ultimate problem with FGM

what does Nussbaum think is ultimately wrong with FGM?

ideal observers

those (probably imaginary) people who are fully informed, perfectly rational, and otherwise perfectly suited to determine the content of morality

Occam's razor

The instruction to never multiply entities beyond necessity. in the context of selecting among competing theories, it tells us to choose that theory that can explain as much as any other, while making the fewest assumptions

normative features

those features that tell us how things ought to be, or how we should behave. they rely on norms to do this

categorical reason

a reason to do something that applies to a person regardless of her desires

ad hominem attack

an attempt to undermine the position of an opponent by criticizing his motives or character

evaluative beliefs

beliefs that evaluate something, and so assess it as good or bad, virtuous or vicious, and so on

de marneffe believes that drug use should be legal because people deserve to have self-sovereignty, and they should be able to possess small amounts of drugs that are only for their own consumption, but large scale manufacturing and sale of drugs should remain criminalized by the government for the protection of the people. the unhealthy food objections is an argument that compares the government regulating drugs and alcohol as the same as preventing people from eating foods they like. de marneffe responds to this by saying that the government won't regulate exactly what you put into your body, but rather regulates the manufacturing and sale of goods, which is already done with food, allowing people to maintain their self-sovereignty

briefly describe de marneffe's view. what is the unhealthy foods objection? how does de marneffe respond to this objection?

in the case of the honor killing, a young woman was raped by a man and then murdered by her father for having premarital sex. the father defends his actions by saying that his daughter dishonored the family and had to die for her actions. this is a problem for both cultural relativism and ethical subjectivism because the majority of people and cultures believe that the actions are wrong, which creates a disagreement about morals because the father believes that he has done something just.

briefly describe the case of the honor killing discussed in this chapter. how does this present a problem for cultural relativism? how would it also present a problem for ethical subjectivism?

expressivism is a view that denies the objectivity of morality by claiming that there are no moral features in this world and no moral judgments are true. expressivism merely states that the person is only expressing emotions, orders, or commitments. this is a problem for truth-preservation because it's essentially claiming that nothing, not even science, is true, which makes the argument itself false

define expressivism. describe the problem for this view related to truth-preservation in logical arguments

moral skepticism

the view that there are no objective moral standards. This is also sometimes taken to refer to the view that we can have no moral knowledge

hedonism is the view that pleasure is the only thing that is intrinsically valuable, and pain (or unhappiness) is the only thing that is intrinsically bad. this is a theory of well-being because it claims that anything that makes us happy, whether we think so or not, is good for us in the end. "the limits of explanation" is appealing because it allows a person to end an argument about their actions with the fact that those actions make them happy. no matter how long the explanations may continue, the end results is that it always ends in happiness

define hedonism. explain why it is a theory of well-being. then, tell me about its appeal regarding "the limits of explanation"

the argument from cultural variation states that if ethical subjectivism is true, then all moral standards apply universally--to everyone, in every society, and some moral standards do not apply universal, but only in certain cultural or social contexts and not in others, therefore making ethical objectivism false. an example of this is giving a dowery to your in-laws in India being a sign of respect, but it's not common to give dowries in the United States. shafer-landau says that objectivists can respond to this by saying that giving dowries is an extension on the basic ideas that you should respect your family, regardless of your culture or your society

describe the argument from cultural variation using an example of cultural variation using an example of cultural variation. how does shafer-landau suggest the objectivist should respond to this argument?

I believe that money is instrumentally valuable because although the possession of money itself doesn't hold any intrinsic value, the ability to purchase material things as well as experiences brings about happiness

give an example of something that is instrumentally valuable. explain why you categorize it this way

the two types of moral skepticism are ethical relativists and moral nihilists. someone is a moral skeptic if they don't believe that there are objective moral standards

name two types of moral skepticism. what makes someone a moral skeptic?

fact-value distinction

the view that there is a sharp difference between facts and values; value claims are not factual, and so cannot be true

ethical objectivism

the view that there is at least one objective moral standard

vicious

possessed of many vices; the opposite of virtuous

norms

standards of behavior that supply us with ideals or requirements

metaphysics

the branch of philosophy that discusses the nature of reality, what exists, and what does not exist

autonomy

the capacity to determine for yourself the principles that you will live by. it can also refer to your ability to live according to your own plan of life

moral nihilism

the form of moral skepticism that says that the world contains no moral features, and so there is nothing for moral claims to be true of. its two major forms are the error theory and expressivism

error theory

the metaethical view there are no moral features in this world; no moral judgments are true; our sincere moral judgements try, and always fail, to describe the moral features of things; and there is no moral knowledge

paternalism

the policy of treating mature people as if they were children. more specifically, it is a policy of limiting someone's liberty, against his will, for his own good

dogmatism

the trait of being closed-minded and unreasonably confident of the truth of one's views

expressivism

the version of moral nihilism that denies that there are any moral features in this world; claims that there is nothing for moral judgments to be true of; and analyzes moral judgments as expressions of emotions, orders, or commitments, none of which are the sorts of things that can be true or false

ethical subjectivism

the view that an act is morally right just because (a) I approve of it or (b) my commitments allow it, and that an action is wrong just because (a) I disapprove of it or (b) my commitments forbid it

cultural relativism

the view that an act is morally right just because it is allowed by the guiding ideals of the society in which is is performed, and immoral just because it is forbidden by those ideals

ethical relativism

the view that correct moral standards are relative to individual or cultural commitments. this can take two forms: cultural relativism or ethical subjectivism

moral naturalism

the view that moral features are natural feature, whose existence can be confirmed by means of the natural sciences

hedonism

the view that pleasure is the only thing that is intrinsically valuable, and pain (or unhappiness) is the only thing that is intrinsically bad

mutually exclusive means that only one of these views can be true, but logically exhaustive means that at least one is true

what does it mean that objectivism, relativism, and nihilism are mutually exclusive?...and logically exhaustive?

error theorists believe that moral judgements are always false, whereas expressionists believe that moral judgements are neither true nor false, but rather an expression of emotions, orders, or commitments

what exactly do error theorists and expressionists disagree about?

the first criticism Nussbaum replies to is that it is morally wrong to criticize the practices of another culture unless one is prepared to be similarly critical of comparable practices when they occur in one's own culture. she finds this to be true, however claims that western cultures tend to over-criticize themselves, not ignore the problems they hold

what is the first criticism Nussbaum responds to in her article? does she think this criticism is true or false? how does she respond to the criticism?

the paradox of hedonism is the idea that those who continuously strive for greater happiness will almost never reach it

what is the paradox of hedonism?

prohibitionists and legalizers disagree on whether or not drugs should be legal to possess, consume, and manufacture

what precisely do prohibitionists and legalizers disagree about?

de marneffe believes his stance isn't paternalistic because he believes that people should have self sovereignty and possess the right to use drugs, however he also believes that the sale and manufacture of drugs ought to be criminalized

why does de marneffe think his stance on drugs is not paternalistic?