PHL-CH 1&2: Week OneWhat ir

What is the view of moral judgements known as? what is it opposing view?

1. Cognitivism 2. Noncognitivism

What are some example questions that drive the search for answers in applied ethics?

1. Did the doctor do the right thing in performing the abortion? 2. Is it morally permissible for scientists to perform experiments on people without their consent? 3. Was it right for the journalists to distort her reporting to aid a particular side in the war?

What are some reasons to deny: " If people's judgements about right and wrong differ from culture to culture, then right and wrong are relative to culture, and there are no objective moral principles."

1. Differences in moral judgements do not show that morality itself is relative from culture to culture. Disagreements themselves do not show if both cultures are equally correct or that there is no objectively correct answer. 2. How deep are disagreements among cultures?: People can differ in their moral judgments not just because they accept different moral principles but also because they have different/ divergent nonmoral beliefs. They have embraced the same moral principles but moral judgments can conflict because their nonmoral beliefs lead them to apply those principles in very different ways. Therefore disagreements may not indicate differences in fundamental moral standards but, nonmoral standards.

What do religious and secular critics say about the dilemma of the divine command theory?

1. Is an action morally right because God wills it to be so, or does God will it to be so because it is morally right? The issue is that if an action is right only because God wills it then crimes and evil actions would be right only because God wills it. If God has unlimited power then he could easily will such actions. So if God commands an action, the command would be without reason, completely arbitrary. 2. If God wills an action because it is morally right, independent of God, then the divine command theory must be false. God does not create rightness; he simple knows what right is and wrong is and it is and God is subjected to moral law as humans are.

What implications of cultural relativism render it implausible?

1. It implies moral infallibility- that culture simply cannot be mistaken about a moral issue. But, cultural infallibility in moral matters is flagrantly implausible, does it make any sense to say cultures could not have been mistaken about the morality of these actions? 2. Social reformers of every sort would always be wrong: their culture would be the ultimate authority on moral matters, so if they disagree, they could not be right. 3. Determining what is right is very different from what most people think, being that what people think is right is morally right, is what makes this doctrine flawed. 4. Cultures cannot be criticized from the outside, but we in fact do criticize cultures and believe it is legitimate to do so. 6. There is no objective standard to compare the past with the present to judge moral progress. 7. How do we choose which social group to reflect cultural relativism and its moral standards- there is an identification problem to preclude moral decisions, let alone enlightened ones.

What are the drawbacks of accepting without question, the moral beliefs and norms given to you by your family and your society?

1. It undermines your personal freedom: If you accept and never question beliefs, they are not yours, they control the path you take in life. 2. The no questions asked approach increases the chances that your responses to moral dilemmas or contradictions will be incomplete, confused or mistaken because the person does not have the intellectual tools to critically evaluate and reevaluate existing moral beliefs 3. If there is such a thing as intellectual moral growth, you are unlikely to find it on the safe route if you do not do ethics because you are locked in an intellectual limbo, where exploration in ethics and personal moral progress is barely possible. 4. Paul Taylor suggests: If a person blindly embraces the morality bequeathed to him by his society, he may be a fine embodiment of the rules of his society and accept them with certainty, but he will lack the ability to defend his beliefs by a rational argument against criticism, resulting in being lost and bewildered and might leave him disillusioned about morality. he may then turn from dogmatic certainty to total skepticism, then to an amoral life. Thus a person who blindly accepts moral beliefs can end up denying all morality.

besides moral norms, what other norms are there?

1. Legal norms (laws and statutes) 2. Aesthetic norms (for judging artistic creations) 3. prudential norms (practical considerations of self interest)

What are the three basic branches of other philosophy?

1. Logic (The study of correct reasoning) 2. Metaphysics (The study of the fundamental nature of reality. 3. Epistemology (the study of knowledge)

What are the three divisions in ethics?

1. Normative ethics 2. metaethics 3. applied ethics

What is the stated argument that objectivism is an empty dream?

1. People's judgments about right and wrong differ from culture to culture. 2. If people's judgments about right and wrong differ from culture to culture, then right and wrong are relative to culture, and there are no objective moral principles. 3. Therefore, right and wrong are relative to culture and there are no objective moral principles.

What is one reason why religious people need moral reasoning and not just to know what God says?

1. Religious moral codes and other major religious rules of conduct are really vague, laying out general principles that may be difficult to apply to specific cases. (secular moral codes have the same disadvantage). Specific situations force believers to interpret religious directives, to try to apply general rules to specific cases, to draw out the implications of particular views- in other words: to do ethics.

What does subjective relativism say?

1. The Action X is right for Ann if she approves of it. 2. The action X is wrong for Greg if he disapproves of it. 3. Thus the action can be both right and wrong- right for Ann but wrong for Greg.

What does it mean to say an argument is valid? If it is valid what is the next thing to do?

1. The conclusion does indeed follow from its premises. 2. The next thing to do is ask if the premises are true.

What are the elements of ethics that make it the peculiar enterprise it is? Name the factors in the textbook discussion

1. The preeminence of Reason 2. The universal Perspective 3. The Principal of Impartiality 4. The dominance of moral norms

What are the easy roads that bypass critical and thoughtful scrutiny of morality?

1. Various forms of subjectivism. 2. You can establish all your moral beliefs by simply consulting your feelings. If it feels right, it is right. 3. Subjective relativism: Moral realities are relative to each person. What a person believes or approves of determines the rightness or wrongness of actions. If you believe it is right/ wrong, then it is: ei abortion.

What are two reasons to oppose emotivism's stance on how reasons function in a moral discourse?

1. We ordinarily suppose the reasons should be relevant to the cognitive content of moral judgements 2. We normally make a clear distinction between influencing someone's attitudes and showing (by providing reasons) that a claim is true- a distinction that emotivism cannot make.

What are some examples of questions of metaethics about the fundamental concerns of the meaning and structure of moral beliefs?

1. What does it mean for an action to be right? 2. Is good the same thing as desirable? 3. How can a moral principal be justified? 4. Is there such a thing as moral truth?

What are the two questions that break down the relationship between religion and morality?

1. What is the relationship between religion and ethics (the philosophical study of morality): How religion relates to the kind of investigation we conduct in this book- the use of experience and critical reasoning to study morality. Whatever your views on on religion and morality, an open minded expedition into ethics is more useful and empowering that you may realize. 2. What is the relationship between religion and morality (belief of right and wrong)?

The statement "everyone should respect a person's right to life" is making what kind of judgement and why?

A Judgement about obligations: It is a claim of what we should/ought to do: therefore it is a judgement of obligation.

What are examples of secular systems of morality?

Ancient Greek Philosophers, Immanuel Kant, the utilitarian's, and others have left their mark on western ethics. They have not moved the millions that think morality is a product exclusively of religion.

What does moral philosophy try to answer?

Answer the fundamental questions of morality

What branch of ethics asks if it is morally acceptable to illegally download music?

Applied ethics

What are examples of religious minds who have relied on reason to examine the nature of morality?

Aquinas, Leibniz, Descartes, Kant, Maimonides, and Averroes.

CHAPTER 2

Chapter2

What are the three great religions of western tradition?

Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

What does normative ethics deal with?

Deals with broad questions about moral theories or principles that apply to a wide range of issues. It deals with questions about specific moral issues or cases

What is noncognitivism?

Denies that moral judgements are statements that can be true or false; it holds that they do not ascribe properties to anything.

What approach does science use to study morality?

Descriptive ethics

What does the social psychologist Solomon Arch provide as a statement in disagreement with cultural relativism?

Differing moral judgements among societies often arise when the same moral principles are operating but the particulars of cultural situations vary.

What is the most famous noncognitivist view?

Emotivism

What does moral philosophy suggest?

Ethics is a branch of philosophy

what is at stake when we do ethics?

Everything we hold dear. We determine what the most important things are in our lives, what is worth living for and what is worth dying for. Greatest goods, goals worthwhile of pursuit, what virtues to cultivate, and what duties we should and should not fulfill, what value we should put on human life, and what pains and perils we should be willing to ensure for the notions such as common good, justice, and rights.

What is the principal of impartiality?

From the moral point of view, all persons are considered equal and should be treated accordingly. This is implied in all moral statements. The welfare and interests of each individual should be given the same weight as the welfare and interests of all others. Unless there is a morally relevant differences between people, we should treat them the same: we must treat equals equally.

What does ethical or moral in adjective form mean?

Having to do with morality

What question does ethics address, formulated by Socrates?

How ought we live?

What does the nonbeliever Ivan Karamazov declare about the divine command theory?

If God doesn't exist, everything is permissible.

What factor would lead people to rethink if a rule was a genuinely moral rule at all?

If it lacks impartiality.

What happens when moral contradictions or inconsistencies confront religious believers?

Intelligent resolution of the conflict of moral claims can be achieved only by applying a neutral standard that helps sort out competent viewpoints. Neutral standards are applied by moral philosophy in the form of critical thinking, well made arguments, and careful analysis.

In the question: what is the relationship between religion morality/ What is the most interesting query?

Is God the maker of morality? If yes then that is an endorsement of the Divine Command Theory.

What is ethics or Moral Philosophy?

Is the philosophical study of morality: To beliefs concerning right and wrong, good and bad-beliefs than can include judgements, values, rules, principals, and theories that guide our actions, define our values, and give us reasons for being the person we are

What is the crux of the matter in finding cultural relativism implausible?

It does a poor job explaining some of the important features of our moral experience

According to emotivism, what does "Stealing is wrong" say?

It expresses so proposition that can neither be true nor false, it is like saying "Stealing money!" Moral disapproval is the feeling being expressed. Saying an action is right or wrong, is not making any factual statement, not even one about a person's state of mind. In addition, this moral utterance also functions to influence people's attitudes or behavior, to have similar feelings, and act accordingly.

What does Leibniz say in rejecting the divine command theory?

It implies that god is unworthy of Worship.

What is the common sense view of a moral judgement?

It is a kind of thing that makes a claim about moral properties and that such a claim can be supported by reasons.

What is a judgment of value?

It is about what is morally good, bad, blameworthy, or praiseworthy. When you say something makes the world better or worse, you are making a value judgement

What is the focus of moral philosophy that is in contrast to descriptive ethics?

It is not the focus of what people actually believe and do, but what they should believe and do. The point is to determine what actions are right/ wrong and what things are good/ bad.

How does ethics above all involve or require critical reasoning?

It is the consideration of reasons for whatever statements (moral or otherwise) are in question. Whatever our view on moral issues and whatever moral outlook we subscribe to, our common sense moral experiences suggests that if a moral judgement is to be worthy of acceptance, it must be supported by good reasons, and out deliberations on the issue must include a consideration of those reasons.

What is metaethics?

It is the study of the meaning and logical structure of moral beliefs. It is not whether an action is right or whether a persons character is good, but is asks or fundamental questions about these same concerns. It aims to question all assumptions about moral terms and the logical relationships among them to see if they make sense.

What is cultural relativism?

It is the view that an action is morally right if one's culture approves of it. Moral rightness and wrongness are therefore relative to cultures. So in one culture, an action may be morally right; in another culture, it may be morally wrong. Implications: That cultures are morally infallible, that social reformers can never be morally right, that moral disagreements between individuals in the same culture amount to arguments over whether someone disagrees with her culture, that other cultures cannot be legitimately criticized, and that moral progress is impossible.

In the view of subjective relativism, what does it say about disagreements?

It says that moral disagreements cannot happen. When two people express attitudes on subjects, they are not really disagreeing, but merely describing those attitudes. Claims are not opposed to each other. They are about different subjects, so both could be true. Thus, because moral disagreements are a fact of moral life, and subjective relativism is inconsistent with these facts, the doctrine is implausible.

Why did Mary Midgely say that moral judgements are a necessary element to our thinking?

Judging involve sour whole nature- it isn't just icing on the cake of self identity. Judging makes it possible for us to "find our way through a whole forest of possibilities".

What is the backbone of critical reasoning/ moral reasoning?

Logical argument: Not the angry exchange type- consists of a statement to be supported (the assertion to be proved, the conclusion) and the statements that do the supporting (the reasons for believing the statement, the premises). -Logical arguments try to show that a moral judgment is or is not justified, that a moral principal is or is not sound, that an action is or is not morally permissible, or that a moral theory is or is not plausible.

What are some good reasons for treating someone differently?

Matter of life and death: like a patient who had a heart attack and need immediate care, so that person receives faster and more sophisticated care.

Why is the idea that morality is relative to culture obvious?

Modern sociology has left no doubt that people's moral judgments differ from culture to culture. An inference from differences in the moral beliefs of cultures to the conclusion that cultures make morality. Greater knowledge has brought greater tolerance. Cultures determine moral rightness and that objective morality is a myth.

What does moral philosophy not do to make debates more productive?

Moral philosophy does not eliminate all disagreements between groups

What is Emotivism's account of how reasons function in moral discourse?

Moral reasons have a different function. Reasons are intended not to support statements (because there are no moral statements) but to influence the emotions or attitudes of others. Because moral utterances express emotions or attitudes, 'presenting reasons" is a matter of offering nonmoral facts that can influence those emotions and attitudes. It implies that good reasons encompass any nonmoral facts that can alter someone's attitude. The essential criterion is whether the adduced facts are sufficiently influential. Such nonmoral facts can appeal to someone's ignorance, arrogance, racism, or fear.

Is there a a necessary connection between tolerance and cultural relativism?

No, Cultural relativist cannot consistently advocate tolerance. To advocate tolerance is to advocate an objective moral value. Intolerance can be justified just as easily as tolerance can.

Logic requires that moral norms and judgments follow the ?

Principal of universalizability.

What have theists' said about reason?

Reason is a gift from God that enabled human beings to grasps the truth of science, life, and morality.

What is emotivism?

Says that moral judgements cannot be true or false because they do not make any claims- they merely express emotions or attitudes. Moral utterances are something akin to exclamations that simply express approving or disapproving feelings: "Violence against women is disgusting" or "Shoplifting-love it!"

What did Mary Midgely argue in explaining the meaning of what Jesus said, "Judge not that ye be not judged" in opposition to the belief that it means an argument of trashing the "whole faculty of judgement".

She claims Jesus was taking aim at sweeping condemnations and vindictiveness: he was not trashing the "whole faculty of judgement". It was a subtle point that while we cannot possible avoid judging, we can see to it that we judge fairly, as we would expect other to do to us. This is justice as fairness as a discernment about a particular case and person and deed.

What are some questions that are the preoccupation of normative ethics?

Should the rightness of actions be judged by their consequences, is happiest the greatest good in life, is utilitarianism a good moral theory?

Why is subjective relativism a difficult view to hold?

Slides from subjective relativism to objectivism suggest a conflict between these two perspectives and the need to resolve it through critical reasoning.

What moral view expresses the notion that an action is right if someone approves of it/ moral rightness is a matter of personal taste/ preference.

Subjective relativism

What does being morally infallible in the view of a subjective relativist mean?

Subjective relativism implies that in rendering of any moral opinion, each person is incapable of being in error. If we approve of an action- and we are sincere in our approval- then that action is morally right. We literally cannot be mistake for this, because our approval makes an action morally right. If anything is obvious about our moral experience, it is that we are not infallible. We sometimes are mistaken in our moral judgements, we are after all not Gods.

Defenders of the divine command theory reply to Leibniz that God would never command us to commit heinous acts, because God is all Good, because of his supreme goodness, he only wills what is good. What do thinkers say in response to this?

Such reasoning renders the very idea of God's goodness meaningless. If "X is good" means "X is commanded by God" then "God's commands are good" would mean only "God's commands are commanded by God" an empty truism.

What does our moral experience suggest about cultural relativism?

That moral relativism has matters exactly backward. Social reformers have often been right when they claimed their cultures were wrong, and this fact suggests that cultural relativism is wrong about mortality.

What is applied ethics?

The application of moral norms to specific moral issues or cases, particularly those in a profession of such as medicine or law. -Medical ethics -Journalistic ethics -business ethics It studies the results derived from applying a moral principal or theory to specific circumstances.

What are the main components of critical reasoning?

The evaluation of logical arguments and the careful analysis of concepts.

What is the Principal of universalizability?

The idea that a moral statement (a principal, rule, or judgment) that applied in one situation must apply in all other situations that are relevantly similar. If in applies in one situation, it also applies implicitly in all other similar situations. This means that moral judgments in two similar situations cannot differ just because two different people are involved. If reasons apply to a specific case, then those reasons also apply in all relevant similar cases.

What is the justification of civil disobedience?

The justification is that specific laws conflict with moral norms and are therefore invalid. If we judge a law to be bad, we usually do so on moral grounds.

What is Moral Objectivism?

The moral theory is that moral truths exist and they do so independently of what individuals or societies think of them. There are moral facts, and they are not human inventions, fiction, or preferences. But objective principles are not rigid rules that have no exceptions (absolutism) and they do not need to be applied in exactly the same way in every situation and culture.

What is the criticism of how emotivism analyses disagreement?

The notion of disagreement is radically different from our ordinary view. Emotivism implies that disagreements in the usual sense are impossible because if there are no moral facts, you cannot disagree about moral facts. But, when we disagree about a moral issue, there really is a conflict of statements about what is the case. When we are in a conflict of beliefs, we may also experience conflicting attitudes. But we do not think that WE are ONLY experiencing a disagreement in attitude.

What are descriptive ethics?

The scientific study of moral beliefs and practices. It aims to describe and explain how people actually behave and think when dealing with moral issues and concepts. It is empirical research conducted by sociologists, anthropologists, and psychologists.

What are normative ethics?

The study of the principles, rules, or theories that guide our actions and judgments. Normative= norms/ standards of judgement for rightness/ goodness. The purpose of normative ethics is to establish the soundness of moral norms, especially the norms embodied in a comprehensive moral system, or moral theory. We do normative ethics when we use critical reasoning to demonstrate that a moral principle is justified.

What is a characterization of philosophy?

The systematic use of critical reasoning to answer the most fundamental questions in life

What is emotivism?

The view is that moral utterances are neither true nor false but are instead expressions of emotions or attitudes. You are not stating a fact- you are merely emoting and possibly trying to influence someone's behavior. It is simply expressing a preference, and perhaps hoping to persuade other people to see things their way. Implications: that people cannot disagree over the moral facts because there are no oral facts, that presenting reasons in support of a moral utterance is a matter of offering nonmoral facts that can influence someone's attitude, and that nothing is actually good or bad.

What is subjective relativism?

The view that an action is morally right if one approves of it. moral rightness and wrongness are relative not to cultures but to individuals. An action, then, can be right for you but wrong for someone else. Your approval of action makes it right. There is therefore no objective morality, and cultural norms do not make right or wrong- individuals make it right or wrong. Implications: That individuals are morally infallible and that genuine moral disagreement between individuals is nearly impossible.

What is a problematic implication of emotivism?

There is no such thing as goodness or badness. We cannot claim that anything is good/ bad because these properties do not exist. To declare something good is to express positive emotions or a favorable attitude toward it. We may say pain is bad, but badness is not an actual feature of pain, but an expression of our unfavorable attitude toward pain. Suffering has no moral properties. This view on things seems implausible, our moral experience suggests that some things are in fact bad and some are good.

What do many people believe about morality and religion?

They are inseparable: that religion is the source of morality and that moral precepts are simply what God says should be done and are provided to believers with commandments or principles of conduct that are thought to constitute the moral law, the essence of morality. The will of God is the moral law.

What does it mean to say things are instrumentally or extrinsically valuable?

They are valuable as a means to something else.

What does it mean to say things are intrinsically valuable?

They are valuable in themselves, valuable for their own sakes, they are valuable simple because of what they are, without being a means to something else. -Pleasurable, virtue, beauty

What is the common sense view of moral judgments?

They ascribe moral properties to such things as actions and people and that they are therefore statements that can be true or false.

In what way do moral norms stand out from others?

They dominate. Whenever moral principles or values conflict with nonmoral principal or values, the moral considerations usually override the others. They seem more important, critical, and weighty.

Why are feelings an important part of our moral experience?

They make empathy possible, which gives us a deeper understanding of the human impact of moral norms. They serve as internal alarm bells, warning us of the possibility of injustice, suffering, and wrongdoing. But they are unreliable guides to moral truth. So, careful reasoning informs our feelings (whether they reflect emotional needs, prejudices, upbringing, culture, or self interests) and help us decide moral questions on their merits.

What stance do emotivism take on moral disagreements?

They say moral disagreements are not conflicts of beliefs. They are disagreements in attitude. The disagreement is emotive no cognitive. They are not disagreeing on facts but trying to influence each others attitude and behavior.

In a pluralistic society, how to public discussions about moral issues take place?

They take place in a context of shared values such as justice, fairness, equality, and tolerance, and an unwritten understanding that: 1. Moral positions should be explained 2. Claims should be supported by reasons 3. Reasoning should be judged by common rational standards.

What does it mean to talk about nonmoral value?

Things such as televisions, rockets, experiences, and works of art (things other than persons, intentions, etc) are good, but "good" in a nonmoral way. It makes no sense to say they are morally good or bad. The objects themselves excluding the use have nonmoral value.

How does moral philosophy enable productive discourse between religious people of all kinds?

This provides the tools of common ethical concepts and a shared procedure for deciding issues and making judgments.

As a division of philosophy, how does ethics do its work?

Through critical reasoning: the careful, systematic evaluation of statements or claims.

What is the purpose of exercising applied ethics?

To learn something important about either the moral characteristics of the situation or the adequacy of the moral norms

What sort of inquiry is ethics if moral judgements are about feelings and not about truth or falsity?

What are the moral habits of a given person or group of people, and what causes them to have precisely those habits and feelings? This is an inquiry that falls within the scope of the existing social sciences.

What are the concepts or judgments of value?

What is morally good, bad, blameworthy, or praiseworthy? -used to refer mostly to persons, character traits, motives, and intentions. -Moral value

What are concepts or judgements of obligation?

What is obligatory, or a duty, or what we should or ought to do. -Used to refer to actions

What do disagreements among members of the same society amount to according to cultural relativism?

When two people in the same culture disagree on a moral issue, what they are really disagreeing about-the only thing they can rationally disagree about- is whether their society endorses a particular view.

When do we do normative ethics?

When we use critical reasoning to demonstrate that a moral principal is justified, or that a professional code of conduct is contradictory, or that one proposed moral theory is better than the other, or that a person's motive is good.

How do we keep our feelings about moral issues in perspective?

With the use of critical reasoning and argument

What does the continued relevance of the query of ethics suggest?

You cannot escape it and all the choices, feelings, and actions that accompany the ideas about right and wrong, and bad- ideas that persist in your culture and in your mind. You have been assimilating, modifying, or rejecting ethical norms you have inherited from your family, community, and society. You are involved with ethics: you do ethics.

If you decide to take the subjective route to morality, you must also?

critically examine it to see if there are good reasons for choosing it- otherwise the belief it arbitrary and not really yours.

What branch of ethics asks if happiness is the greatest good in life?

normative ethics