Ethics Exam #4
What relation does a moral patient have to a moral agent?
"According to the central (Kantian) tradition in German moral thinking, the domain of moral patients includes all and only moral agents, excluding many nonrational beings as nonpersons or 'things.'"
What relation does a moral patient have to wronging?
"According to the central (Kantian) tradition in German moral thinking, the domain of moral patients includes all and only moral agents, excluding many nonrational beings as nonpersons or 'things.'"
How does it figure in the first version of the categorical imperative?
"Act as if the maxim of your action were to become a universal law of nature."
What is Mill's greatest happiness principle? Is this the same or different from Bentham's principle of utility?
"Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." Same as Bentham
What does Geoffrey Warnock mean by a 'moral patient.'
"Any being that a moral agent can wrong."
How is the price of a single woman determined?
"Women, as things, as items in the sexual marketplace, have a market value that depends in part on whether they have been used. Virgins fetch a higher price than second hand goods."
Identify the difference between doing wrong and wronging.
"You can do wrong by damaging a tree, but you do not thereby wrong the tree."
Choose one. Rachels says that our common picture of moral reality consists of sets of rules that morally serious people follow.
"a system of rules that one must follow from a sense of duty."
How can utilitarianism be seen as a version of the golden rule?
"do as you would be done by, and love your neighbor as yourself."
What does Langton mean by "the sexual marketplace," and what is the relation of unmarried women to it?
"human beings are viewed as having a price, and not a dignity, and where the price of women is fixed in a particular way." ; "Women, as things, as items in the sexual marketplace, have a market value that depends in part on whether they have been used. Virgins fetch a higher price than second hand goods."
What does Kant say about the enjoyment that we get from other people? Of what ethical importance might this be?
"the value of life, insofar as it consists of the enjoyment we get from people, is vastly overrated."; This quote perhaps is telling, since someone who gets little enjoyment from others may have little sympathy or feeling for others.
Does he think that utilitarianism tends to ignore the ethical importance of individual responsibility?
"to come to regard our feelings from a purely utilitarian point of view, as happenings outside of our moral self, is to lose a sense of one's moral identity, to lose one's integrity."
True or false. According to Kant, all particular moral principles, such as 'tell the truth,' derive from a single, general, moral principle. If true what is it, and if false why is it false?
***
True or false. Even though those who argue against utilitarianism, such as Bernard Williams, agree that it gives an accurate account of moral motivation and intention, and does so in terms of its emphasis on the morality of actions.
***
True or false. Mill says that my own happiness is more important than the happiness of another person since only I can experience my happiness, and I can't directly experience the happiness of another.
***
True or false. Mill says that my own happiness is more important than the happiness of another person since I am in a better able to know what makes me happy than I am to know what makes anyone else happy.
***
Which version of the categorical imperative would lying violate?
***
How does utilitarianism as a consequentialism differ from egoism as a consequentialism?
...
What does it mean to say that an imperative is categorical?
A categorical imperative is unconditional - 'categorical' means absolute, unqualified, or unconditional.
What is the difference between a hypothetical and a categorical imperative? Which is said to be prudential? Why?
A hypothetical imperative concerns an action that "is good only as a means to something else." A categorical imperative concerns an action that "is conceived of as good in itself."
What is a maxim?
A maxim is a principle or rule of conduct, such as 'keep your promises.'
What does Kant mean by a good will? How important is a good will to Kant?
A person's will to do the right thing, the thing that reason can identify as the morally correct thing to do, is a good will, and one that does not is not thoroughly good; A good will, considered by itself as it is in itself, is much more admirable than anything that it brings about.
How does it figure in the Jim-Pedro experiment?
A utilitarian could say that Jim had negative responsibility for 19 deaths of lives that he could have saved by choosing one of 20 people to die.
What is the kingdom of ends for Kant?
According to Kant, when we all recognize each other as ends in themselves, and not merely as means to an end, then our community, our kingdom, becomes a community of persons treated as ends in themselves, or what Kant calls a kingdom of ends.
What is the key property that an entity has to have in order to be considered to be part of the moral community according to Kant, and the German tradition in ethics? Does Sommers agree with Kant on this? If so why, and if not why not?
According to the German tradition in ethics, you cannot wrong a non-rational being or thing; Yes
What is Kant's first version of the categorical imperative?
Act only on that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."
What is the difference between an act and an omission, and how can the latter be subject to moral evaluation?
Actions are what you chose to do and omissions are what you chose not to do; individuals are responsible for the effects brought about by their intentional actions.
What does it mean to call a person a rational free agent?
Because of our rationality, we can understand the difference between right and wrong. And, because of our rationality, we can understand moral laws that it is our duty to accept as binding.
Why does utilitarianism seem to be forward looking rather than backward looking?
Because utilitarianism is a consequentialism it looks to the effects of actions to determine their moral value. And because effects of actions can only come about in the future, utilitarianism seems to be forward looking only to the neglect of the past.
Who is a hedonistic utilitarian, Bentham or Mill? Why?
Bentham
Does Kant think that we could use reason to show that egoism is morally acceptable? Why or why not?
But if we will it to be a universal law that no one should help anyone else, then we would thereby deprive ourselves of the very assistance that we require. Thus in both willing it that no one should help anyone else, while desiring it ourselves when we are in need, we contradict ourselves. Accordingly, it would be impossible to will a lack of concern for others to "have the universal validity of a law of nature."
State why the dropping of atom bombs on Japan by the U. S. represents a contest in ethics between rules and consequences.
Elizabeth Anscombe thought, like Kant, that some moral rules are absolute, and that "some things may not be done, no matter what" - such as burning innocent children alive, which is what happened when the U.S. dropped the atomic bombs on Japan. On the other hand, the military calculated that an invasion of Japan would likely cost the lives of 250,000 American soldiers. The bombings, which killed about that many Japanese, prevented the invasion. Was Truman right to put American lives above Japanese lives?
True or false. Kant says that it can be morally acceptable to lie.
False
True or false. Kant says that you are a moral person as long as you do the right thing, and so in spite of whatever your motivation for behaving correctly may be.
False
True or false. The correct answer to the preceding question means that an act is morally correct for Kant in virtue of its consequences.
False
True or false. Rachels agrees with Kant that moral rules should always be followed regardless of their consequences.
False***
Give an example of how a particular moral principle is tested in relation to the first version of the categorical imperative.
For Kant, a particular moral principle can be tested by asking if a rule pertaining to behavior that goes against the principle can be universalized.
Why does Kant say that suicide is morally wrong?
For Kant, the crucial thing for the morality of suicide is whether or not one could will it to be the case that committing suicide to end suffering from self-love be a universal law of nature. And he thinks that it cannot since, according to Kant, to commit suicide out of self-love is contradictory. It is contradictory because self-love is the very thing that motivates us to improve our lives.
Give an example of a hypothetical imperative
For instance, your building a good collection of art will be dependent on your ability to recognize good art. It is therefore imperative that you learn something about art so that you can tell the good from the bad. The hypothetical command of reason in this case would be: "If you want to build a good collection of art then (the hypothetical) learn about art (the imperative).
How do the terms 'right' and 'wrong' or 'good' and 'bad' get their meaning for Bentham and any utilitarian?
For utilitarianism, these terms are given meaning in relation to happiness or pleasure, and unhappiness or pain.
What is the goal of life according to utilitarianism?
Happiness
What, according to Kant, determines the moral correctness of an act? How do we know?
Having understood what is the right thing to do, we then act in a morally correct way when we freely choose to act according to the moral law that reason has recognized to be correct.
What does Williams say about individual responsibility in relation to utilitarianism?
However, they are just one person's feeling bad, and the greater good that was served by the action of killing outweighs the individual unhappiness.
State what Professor Strayer calls 'The Paul Gauguin Problem,' and why it represents a problem for Kantian ethics.
In what I call The Paul Gauguin problem, Paul Gauguin made a promise to stay with his wife when he married her. And he made an implicit promise to take care of his children when he impregnated his wife and brought them into the world. But Gauguin was an artistic genius, who, according to Kant, had a duty to his genius. And Gauguin thought that they only way that he could "take pains to enlarge and improve" his natural ability was to quit his job, and leave his wife and children to devote himself to art. Here then is a conflict between keeping a promise and fidelity to talent, both of which Kant tells us fit the first version of the categorical imperative because, while they can be universalized rules going against them cannot.
What is the so-called 'Case of the Inquiring Murderer,' and why is it thought to be a problem for Kant's ethics?
Isn't the person murdered in 'The Case of the Inquiring Murderer?' being treated as a thing when lying might have saved his life? That is, the value placed on abiding by the rule of telling the truth is thought to be more valuable than the life of a person.
What does the correct answer to the previous question mean for following or not following rules in morality?
It concerns the necessity of a correct moral action itself without reference to any consequence of the action.
Fill in the blank. Williams' Jim-Pedro thought experiment is meant to show that utilitarianism has a problem with ________.
Justice
What does practical reason mean for Kant?
Kant calls our ability to act according to principles, or our capacity to use our free will to do the right thing, practical reason.
What effect does Kant's reclassification of Maria as "deranged" have on her personhood and his perceived responsibility in relation to her? How does Langton respond to this?
Kant does not reply to Maria or honor her request to visit him, but now considers her mentally deranged and sends off her letters to an acquaintance. Langton says that evil for Kant is "the reduction of persons to things"
Choose one. Rachels says that what is of fundamental importance in Kant's ethics is its focus on reason/feeling/the consequences of actions
Kant's recognition of our rationality, and its importance for morality, is an idea of fundamental importance in ethics.
What does Langton say about Maria in relation to the second version of the categorical imperative?
Langton says that evil for Kant is "the reduction of persons to things" (the second version of the categorical imperative). Langton points out that, in the society in which Maria lived, "women must perpetually walk a tightrope between being treated as things and treated as persons."
What, for Langton, is the point of the story of Maria von Herbert for Kantian ethics?
Maria's life with its problems "constitutes a profound challenge to Kant's philosophy"
Is someone moral for Kant if, although he does the right thing, he does it for the wrong reason, or from the wrong motive?
No
Does Kant think that we could rationally will it to be the case that everyone is lazy, and so wastes whatever ability he or she may have? Why or why not?
No; He cannot will that we ought to neglect our talents since it is by means of our talents that we develop and improve our lives, and this is what a rational being aims for.
Is it okay, according to Kant, to treat people as means? If so why, and if not why not
No; Thus something like slavery is morally reprehensible since you are treating a slave as a thing and not as a person, you are using a slave as a machine or an instrument of cheap labor and not recognizing his or her essential humanity.
Might it be suggested that Kant bears some responsibility for Maria's suicide? If so why, and if not why not?
No; because according to Kant you are not responsible for bad consequences of telling the truth.
Does Sommers think that the holocaust could have happened in a country that subscribes to the British tradition in ethics? If so why, and if not why not?
No; the British tradition in ethics in which the focus is on basic sentience and feeling.
What kind of person rates higher in Kant's opinion than any other?
None***The deontologist will typically hold that his moral standards are higher than those of the consequentialist.
Why is rational free agency relevant to ethics?
Our freedom to choose means then that we are capable of freely acting on this knowledge, and so we can freely choose to do what is proper, or not.
What is the meaning of the term that correctly completes the preceding question?
Sentient - adj {L sentient-, sentiens, prp of sentire to perceive, feel] (1632) 1: responsive to or conscious of sense impressions 2: AWARE 3: finely sensitive in perception or feeling. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition.
What is Kant's second version of the categorical imperative?
So act as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, in every case as an end and never as means only.
Does Sommers agree with the British tradition about what kind of being can be wronged? How might such a view have affected the treatment of the Jews according to Sommers?
Sommers recognizes that the treatment of the Jews by the Nazis "would surely have horrified Kant," but "a moral philosophy which does not directly proscribe cruelty to nonpersons" makes it possible to mistreat any being which is not thought to qualify as a person. For the Nazis, Jews did not qualify as persons. Accordingly, Sommers then points out that, "If Jews are like insects, killing them is not a crime against humanity."
How do philosophers such as Mill and Singer and Williams think that we can become happy?
That happiness cannot be found by pursuing it for its own sake, but can only result from something else that we are pursuing is the paradox of hedonism.
State the differences between the German and British tradition in ethics as indicated by Sommers.
The German tradition in ethics focuses on reason. The focus of this rationalist tradition is "on persons and our duties to them." The British tradition in ethics focuses on feeling, and on attitudes, thoughts, and judgements as they relate to or are prompted by feeling. The focus for the sentimentalist tradition is "on all beings that can feel pain or pleasure and directly prohibits cruelty to all sentient beings."
How is the moral value of an action - its being right or wrong - determined according to utilitarianism?
The moral correctness of each moral action is to be determined by whether or not it will increase or decrease the happiness of those who are likely to be affected by the action.
What is the paradox of hedonism?
The paradox of hedonism is that pleasure cannot be found by seeking pleasure itself, rather than particular things from which pleasure results.
Why does Maria find Kant's moral philosophy to be of no help to her in her time of need? What does she ask of Kant? How does he respond to her?
The problem for Maria is that Kant's philosophy does not help her in dealing with the pain that she now experiences; Kant writes back to Maria and tells her that the man's indignation is justified [really?] but that she was right to have told the truth, since it is our duty to tell the truth.
Who would say that Jim is negatively responsible here, the utilitarian or Williams? Why?
The utilitarian because the friends and relatives of the 20 dead innocent people might blame Jim for not choosing one of Pedro's 20 prisoners to die to save the other 19.
Why is Kant's ethics called 'deontological?'
The word deontology comes from the Greek words deon for duty and logos for science. Thus deontology would be the science of duty, or duty theory.
What do act and rule utilitarianism have in common? How do they differ?
They are both trying to increase happiness; act increases happiness right away, rule increases happiness over time.
How does sympathy or any sort of human feeling figure in Kant's ethics?
They do not matter as long as the moral law is being followed
What is a hedonistic utilitarian?
Thinking all pleasures are equal and looked at sources of pleasure in terms of intensity, duration, immediacy, and certainty of gratification, and suggested that quantity rather than quality of pleasure was important.
Why can violation of individual rights be a problem for utilitarianism?
Thus if 10 people could be made happy by seeing the indecent pictures of one person that were taken and disseminated against that person's will, then utilitarianism says that that greater happiness is more important than that individual's rights.
How, according to Mill, is a hierarchy of pleasures determined?
Thus if people who have experienced both pleasure A and pleasure B prefer one to the other, then the preferred pleasure is superior. And one pleasure A is greatly superior to another pleasure B when, even if A comes with some displeasure, people would rather have A than B.
How is a particular moral law to be tested according to Kant?
To test a moral act one can ask: "What would happen if everyone did this?" Or, "Would it be okay for anyone to do this in the same or similar circumstances?" If what I am about to do is morally correct then, for Kant, it would be morally correct for everyone to do the same thing in the same circumstances.
What is impartiality in ethics, and why can it be a problem for utilitarianism?
To treat people impartially is to treat them equally, and the ideal of impartiality in ethics is to treat everyone equally; Should we treat everyone equally, or should we give special consideration to family and friends over distant strangers?
True or false. A common criticism of Kant's ethics is that following moral laws without exceptions can have absurd consequences.
True
True or false. A possible defense of utilitarianism is that it explains why we have an obligation to do certain things, such as tell the truth, that otherwise seem inexplicable.
True
True or false. According to Kant reason identifies moral laws that it is our duty to accept as binding.
True
True or false. According to Sommers, it is dangerous to omit feeling and compassion as important to morality in favor of a pure concentration on reason.
True
True or false. Following a moral principle, such as 'keep your promises,' is morally correct for Kant even if the consequences of following the principle are bad.
True
True or false. For both Mill and Epicurus, quality of pleasure matters in addition to quantity of pleasure.
True
True or false. It is a criticism made of either kind of utilitarianism that it is difficult to see how it can be fairly applied.
True
True or false. It is a criticism made of either kind of utilitarianism that it is difficult to see how it can be practically applied.
True
True or false. Kant says that the moral person freely chooses to do the right thing because it is the right thing to do.
True
True or false. Kant says that, in addition to following moral rules that reason can identify as binding, we should follow moral rules because we can never be sure of what the consequences of breaking a rule, such as 'tell the truth,' would be.
True
True or false. Kantian ethics places a rational constraint on what we can do if we are morally serious.
True
True or false. Rachels agrees with Kant that moral reasons, if valid, are binding on all people at all times.
True
True or false. Rachels says that a problem for Kant is that he says that we are morally responsible for any bad consequences of lying, but that we are not morally responsible for any bad consequences of telling the truth.
True
True or false. Rachels thinks that violating a rule is morally acceptable if that violation is due to a reason that all rational people would accept.
True
True or false. Rachels thinks that we tend to view persons as rational agents.
True
True or false. Sommers thinks that Kantian ethics allows for the mistreatment of certain peoples because they can be reclassified as nonpersons.
True
True or false. Sommers thinks that the holocaust, or the extermination of the Jews at the hands of the Nazis in World War II, could only have happened in a country like Germany. If this is true state why it is true, and if it is false state why it is false.
True
Choose one. Kant says that moral requirements are/are not categorical.
True; Rachels
True or false. Sommers thinks that Kantian ethics is dangerous. If true why is it true, and if false why is it false?
True; the German rational tradition does not do this, and so is not only inferior to the British tradition, but is dangerous.
What does Bentham mean by an object's utility?
Utility for Bentham means the property of an object that enables it to produce pleasure, good, benefit, advantage, or happiness in people. Utility for Bentham also means the property of an object whereby it prevents the occurrence of pain, evil, or unhappiness for someone.
If Kant thinks that animals should not be mistreated, then why does he think that animals should not be mistreated?
We do have an indirect duty to refrain from acts of cruelty to animals because such behavior could corrupt our character, and this could affect the way we behave to rational beings to whom we do owe respect."
What is free agency?
We have free will, or can freely choose between options, including moral options, and so we can freely choose to do right or wrong.
What does it mean to say that a moral principle is universalizable? What is the importance of this to Kantian ethics?
What is morally right for one person is morally right for everyone; That morality is universal and objective, rather than local, historical, and subjective, means that every rational agent has an obligation to do what is right.
What, for Williams, is the importance of the notion of personal integrity in relation to this thought experiment in particular, and to utilitarianism in general?
Williams says that a person's responsibility for his own behavior is closely connected to the notion of integrity.
True or false. Williams disagrees with the utilitarian that our moral feelings are partially responsible for our moral attitudes.
Williams thinks that our moral feelings are very important since they are responsible in part for our moral attitudes.
Do you think that Kantian ethics is too extreme for humanity to live by?
Yes
Does Williams think that negative responsibility is important to utilitarianism?
Yes
Does a person have absolute moral worth or value for Kant?
Yes
Is a human being an end-in- herself or a means to something else for Kant?
Yes
Might Kantian ethics be accused of being too abstract and unfeeling?
Yes
Does the right answer mean that utilitarianism has a problem or not regarding the past, according to Rachels?
Yes, it means that utilitarianism has a problem regarding the past.
Can a person be responsible not only for what he does, but, at least in some cases, for what he does not do? Why?
Yes; A person B who does not commit an action x that would have, or might have, prevented something y from happening, and y is bad, then B bears some responsibility for y, not for what she did but for what she did not do.
Does Williams think that it is possible for utilitarianism to alienate an individual from a particular project with which he identifies? How? What, according to Williams, is a consequence of this?
Yes; For Williams, to say that a person ought to live his or her life primarily as it fits into the plan of increasing the overall happiness is to alienate him from the things that give his life meaning and value; And this is an attack on his integrity.
Does Langton think that Maria had a duty to lie in the society of her time? If so why, and if not why not?
Yes; Langton thinks that perhaps Maria can be permitted to lie because the culture in which she lives is evil. It is evil since it sees unmarried women who are not virgins as things rather than persons.
Does Sommers think that, according to the Kantian, view, if someone who mistreated animals would not be affected by that mistreatment, then it would be morally acceptable to mistreat them? Why or why not?
Yes; The problem with the Kantian philosophy on this issue, for Sommers, is that anyone who would not be corrupted by mistreating animals would not be doing wrong to mistreat them.
Is morality universal for Kant? What does it mean to say that morality is universal?
Yes; What is morally right for one person is morally right for everyone.
Does Rachels think that being strictly impartial may not always be the right thing to do? Is that a problem for utilitarianism?
Yes; Yes
Who thinks that it is appropriate to break a rule of action, an act or a rule utilitarian? Why?
act; because if the act of breaking a rule brings more happiness than following the rule that is the correct thing to do.
What is Bentham's principle of utility?
actions are right when they increase happiness and wrong when they increase or result in pain rather than pleasure.
Fill in the blank. Utilitarianism is concerned with the happiness of _____________.
all*
Choose one. The focus of Kant on reasons shows that a person can/cannot regard herself as special from a moral point of view.
cannot
Choose one. Rachels agrees/disagrees with Kant that moral principles or rules can have no exceptions.
disagrees
Choose one. Animals other than humans do/do not form part of the moral community according to Kant. Why?
do not; the tradition that bases morality on reason, the idea is not that we should respect animals other than humans because of their capacity to feel pain, or that mistreating animals is not wrong in itself because animals then suffer, but because to mistreat an animal could adversely affect the way we treat each other.
What does Mill mean by saying: "It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied." Does this indicate that all pleasures are equal, or that there is a hierarchy of pleasures, including some of which are superior to others even if accompanied by pain?
even though the pleasure A of being a human being comes with a certain amount of displeasure, one would not trade it for the pleasure B of being a pig, even if B was as purely pleasurable as it can be and come with no displeasure.
Choose one. Rachels says that a moral judgement must be backed by good reasons/appropriate feelings/an emphasis on consequences.
good reasons
What is the goal of morality according to utilitarianism?
happiness
What is the ultimate goal of utilitarianism?
happiness
Choose one. Rachels says that Kant has/has not proved that lying is wrong in every instance.
has not
Why does Peter Singer think that happiness exists?
he suggests that happiness has an evolutionary function since it "functions as an internal reward for our achievements." When we achieve something that we are trying to achieve, our reward for that achievement is happiness, and it is something internal since it is something that we feel or experience.
Choose one. Rachels says that utilitarianism makes the past relevant/irrelevant. Why is the correct answer to the previous question the correct answer?
irrelevant
Choose one. The possibility of conflicting duties is/is not a problem for Kantian ethics.
is
Choose one. Utilitarianism is/is not egalitarian. Why?
is
Choose one. Rachels says that Kant's view about what we can know or what we can't know about the consequences of our actions is a realistic view of what we can know about the consequences of our actions/is a pessimistic view of what we can know about the consequences of our actions.
is a pessimistic view of what we can know about the consequences of our actions.
Choose one. For Kant, a good will is/is not good in virtue of what it brings about.
is not
Choose one. The notion of an individual right is/is not a utilitarian notion.
is not
Choose one. Rachels says that common moral thinking is Kantian.
moral
In a contest between happiness and the moral law which should win according to Kant?
moral law
In a contest between the consequences of a moral action and the moral law which should win according to Kant?
moral law***
What alone, for Kant, has absolute value?
moral value
Fill in the blank. For Kant, the most important attribute that a person can have is ____________.
moral worth
What is the most important attribute that a person can possess for Kant?
moral worth
Choose one. The correct answer to the preceding question means that a deontological system, such as Kant's, is a consequentialism/non-consequentialism.
non-consequentialism
Choose one. Mill thinks that all/not all pleasures are equal. Why is the correct answer to the preceding question the correct answer
not all; the "higher" pleasures of the mind or intellect are preferable to the "lower" pleasures of the senses or body.
What is negative responsibility?
not to what a person does, but what a person does not do to prevent something bad from happening.
What does know how to act morally require according to Kant?
reason
What does it mean for Kant to say that the moral person acts out of principle?
recognizing an objective right that applies to everyone.
Fill in the blank. Sommers says that, in the British tradition in ethics any __________ being can be wronged.
sentient
Define hedonism.
the view that pleasure or happiness is the ultimate good, pain the ultimate evil, and that the goal of human action is pleasure or happiness.
What tradition does Sommers think is the superior?
tradition based on feeling
Choose one. A hedonist will/will not recognize that there is a hierarchy of pleasures
will not
What is the relation between the will and reason in relation to morality?
will-we are willing to do something without reason reason-we need a reason to do something
What is the point of the variations of the Jim-Pedro experiment on the handout?
***
What is the universality of morality opposed to?
***
What are human beings for Kant?
According to Kant, human beings are also free agents.
True or false. The utilitarian thinks that her happiness, and that of her family and friends, is more important than the happiness of others.
False
True or false. Utilitarianism is predicated on pleasing God.
False
True or false. Bentham agrees with Mill that all pleasures are equal.
False: Mills does not believe all pleasures are equal
What is the relation of happiness and unhappiness to pleasure and pain for Mill?
Happiness = df. Pleasure and the absence of pain. Unhappiness = df. Pain and the privation of pleasure.
How, according to Williams, do Jim's feelings figure into a utilitarian calculation of what the morally correct thing for Jim to do is? Does Williams agree or disagree with this utilitarian assessment? Why
However, they are just one person's feeling bad, and the greater good that was served by the action of killing outweighs the individual unhappiness. Thus Jim's feelings are less important for the utilitarian than the 19 lives that he saves by choosing one person to die.
How do we differ from other animate and inanimate objects?
Humans are rational in having a "conception of laws," or principles.
What is meant by saying that utilitarianism is a consequentialism?
If the consequences of an action result in an increase in happiness then the action is right. If the consequences of an action increase unhappiness, then it is wrong.
What is the difference between act and rule utilitarianism?
If we are going to concentrate on the anticipated consequences of particular actions in particular places at particular times - as act utilitarianism does - then "we can always dream up circumstances in which a horrific action will have the best consequences." In rule utilitarianism, the principle of utility - act so that you bring about the most happiness in a particular situation - is replaced by rules that pertain to actions that should be followed by all, so that, over time, the best consequences for the greatest number will result, and the overall happiness will increase over time.
True or false. According to Kant the moral person acts out of principle.
True
True or false. According to Kant, and deontological ethics, an action, if right, is right regardless of its consequences.
True
True or false. According to utilitarianism, everyone's pain is equally bad and everyone's pleasure is equally good
True
True or false. Mill says that although a utilitarian can recognize the importance of the intellect to pleasure, no utilitarian, including himself, will see intellectual pleasures as being intrinsically good. Rather, they are good, if they are good, as a means to other, bodily pleasures.
True
True or false. Mill says that one pleasure A cannot be judged to be superior to a different pleasure B if, the experience of A comes with a certain amount of displeasure that B does not have.
True
True or false. Mill says that the things that we desire are desirable for their inherent pleasure , or as a means to obtaining pleasure and avoiding pain.
True
True or false. Mill, Singer, and Williams all agree that one cannot become happy simply by pursuing happiness.
True
True or false. Rachels and Williams agree that utilitarianism can be seen as an attack on the goals and interests of an individual when those goals and interests are not contributing to the overall happiness.
True
True or false. Rachels says that we value some things for reasons other than their making us happy.
True
True or false. Rachels says that, were we to be always strictly impartial we would miss out on much of importance that life has to offer.
True
True or false. The correct answer to the preceding question is a problem for utilitarianism.
True
True or false. The goal of a moral action for a utilitarian is the increase of happiness or pleasure and the decrease of unhappiness or pain
True
True or false. The person of moral worth does the right thing in spite of the influence of subjective conditions, and in spite of the anticipated consequences of her action
True
True or false. Mill agrees with Epicurus and his followers that the chief source of pleasure for humans is pleasure afforded by the body, and not pleasure afforded by the mind.
True*
True or false. Kant says that due to our rationality we cannot be led morally astray by the influence of human desires and appetites.
True***
Does Williams think that utilitarianism has a problem with the idea of pursuing happiness for the sake of happiness? Why?
Yes; Happiness has to be involved with or involve something else. Happiness itself cannot be pursued.
What does it mean to speak of a hierarchy of pleasures
one pleasure is more valuable or desirable than another when those who have experienced both kinds of pleasure prefer one over the other.
