Ethics Midterm

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

DETERMINE

For any science, what are the two (and only two) methods for intelligently disputing an asserted conclusion?

Deny a premise or deny an inference (the conclusion does not follow from the premise)

Is it typically easy, or difficult, to distinguish between subjective and objective judgments? Explain.

Easy because in a subjective judgement you are aware of something (yourself)

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

Factual claim · Any action you do for the sake of pleasure, short term or long term · Pleasure should be understood as Validation, satisfaction, reword · This is Wrong in the claim that is the only motivation

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

If true, then all sciences are false, since everyone's senses and knowledge changes, no one knows what is real and not real. All sciences go out the window

If Epicurus was right, what sort of things would become moral?

Murder, suicide

Consider this "fourth thing" which identifies a science as a particular science; is it something really distinct, or is it a distinction in the mind only (i.e., conceptually distinct)? If the latter, what consequences follow?

Must have a proper object. Studies some unique aspects of reality. Defines each science.

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

NO because states of probability always imply statements of necessity Antiochies critic

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

Natural and moral. Moral evil is a cause of a privation for the sake of a privation with knowledge and will.

Can objective judgments be made without subjective judgments? Why or why not?

No, If i say the room is 76 i have to see it first to say that

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

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

Pyrrho : Pyrrho of Elis. Your senses change and so does your knowledge. All opinions are equally valid.

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

Skepticism

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

Stoicism Marcus Aurelios, Zeno, Spock, and Epicitus

What are the names and definitions of the Cardinal Virtues?

Temperance:moderation or voluntary self-restraint -Prudence:the act of being careful, cautiousness -Justice: is the principle that people receive that which they deserve -Fortitude:courage in pain or adversity.

What might the "fourth thing" of ethics be?

The human good, or the good

Are objective and subjective judgements both judgements of fact?

YES (opinion objective but we acknowledge that there a certain amount of unknown)

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

YES because we all want the ultimate good but different people experience it in different way

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

Yes, they denied it because if the logos is all good and created everything, then there is no evil in the world. You only see evil because you don't understand how logos works. Pain is an illusion.

Can you outline Aquinas' response to their two reasons?

sorrow is a disease of the mind sorrow in the virtuous man, only it has to be a moderate sorrow.

What was the flaw in Epicurus' argument about death?

the relationship with evil and its subject it's a temporal relationship and not a logical one.

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

yes

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

· Avoid extremes and do all things in moderation · Absence of pain

What was the definition of "subjective judgment" as given in class?.

An account of something as it relates to you as a subject

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

1.Any action is automatically good if it produces pleasure 2· It does not gives a way to resolve conflict in competing pleasures 3· Hedonist parodox, maximized ing pain often intensified pleasure is both good and bad at the same time

Four hallmarks of a science were identified in class. Name and define the first three hallmarks.

1.Begin from Observation 2.Use Logic, inductive and deductive (Inductive is how you reach premise you deduce from) 3.Necessary conclusions. If premise and logic is valid, must reach true conclusion

What was the definition of "objective judgment" as given in class?.

An account of something not as it relates to you as a subject

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?

Arcesilaus and Carneades than others but still don't know the opinions are 100% true.

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

No, he agrees that evil is real but it's not a real thing. God creates evil from nothing EX Nihilo

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

· Ego-centric focused of the individual · A-temporal something pleasant today could lead to pain tomorrow

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

· Epicureanism. Epicurus.

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

· Moderation is not good in every sense. · And claims the best life is the passive life.

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

· No, they thought it wasn't bad because the person that experiences death was not there to experience it

What were the two main reasons for the stoics saying that sorrow was incompatible with virtue?

· The two main reasons are that sorrow is an evil and there is no evil in a virtuous man. The other is that sorrow is the disease of the mind.

What was their argument for their position?

· Their argument is that the logos, an all powerful and all knowing force created the universe. So any evil is in the world is just misunderstood because there is no evil

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

· There is a contradiction because you as a person have free will but the logos has a deciding force in what you will do. · Trys to tell you the choices to make

What do the three "good passions" have in common? Is there a form of sorrow that has this trait, too? Would such a sorrow then be considered good?

· They are all moderated by reason. And there is a form of sorrow that has a good passion too that is moderate. That is considered good.

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

· YES They thought it was a bad thing because its taking away a perfection that is naturally supposed to be there. · Death is not bad for the person that dies · The problem is that he thinks that the relationship between evil and subject is a temporal relationship and not a logical one.

8. Given the above four hallmarks, is science something that can be taught? Can something lacking one or more of the hallmarks be taught? Assuming that ethics possesses all four of these hallmarks, is it a science? And if so, can it be taught?

· Yes. And no, it cannot. Assuming it does, it is a science and can be taught.

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

· You can still have an all good God who creates evil · Evil is real but evil is not a real thing. Is the absence of something

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

Toleration: everyone's opinion is just as mine. Tyranny:if all possible opinions are equally valid then what is wrong with me forcing you to do it my way

How does Augustine define evil?

He defines evil as a privation of a perfection natural to that thing.

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

Hedonism is similar to epicureanism because they both correlate the good to something physical. They are different because for hedonists, the good is pleasure while for epicurists, the good is freedom from pain.

Does the presence of an objective judgment eradicate a prior subjective judgment? Explain.

No, just because you know the right thing to do, does not mean you want to do it.

In class we mentioned that many modern thinkers attempt to say that ethics is not a unique science but is in fact just a distorted or "watered down" version of what two sciences?

Psychology and sociology... they reduce to one or the other

Does this "fourth thing" have to be something physically distinct? What is the Latin word used in class to identify the "fourth thing" of a science. Give an example.

Qua: Being as can be. Life=Biology, psyche=psychology.

There is a general school of thought that would reject at least one of these hallmarks as indicative of a true science

Rationalists we need observations = something else (depending on whose is the rationalism)

If two alleged sciences turn out to really have the same "fourth thing," we say that the one science is ________________ to the other; i.e., that the one "science" is in reality merely a subset of the other science. Give a hypothetical example of this.

Reduced to the other. One example is alchemy and chemistry.

What are the three "good passions" according to the stoics? What three "disturbances" do they replace?

The three good passions are desire, joy and caution. The three bad disturbances are covetentous, mirth and fear.

How did the later members of this school amend the theory, and why? Does the amendment work?

They tried to amend it by saying that the logos created everything out of chaos in the void. And that the chaos is uncontrollable. This doesn't work because this means that the logos isn't all powerful.