Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Ethics Exam 2
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Consequentialism | what is right is what brings about the most overall good / ends justify means / MAXIMIZE THE GOOD / form of normative ethics |
| Consequentialist | do as much as you can / direct our attention to the future, not the past (LOOK AT THE CONSEQUENCES OF OUR ACTIONS OR POLICIES) |
| G.E. Moore | English thinker who declared it plain that what is right is whatever produces the most good |
| Optimistic (producing the best possible results) policies/ideas are | the ones that morality requires |
| Finding out how something is optimific: (1-3) | 1. Identify what is intrinsically good (happiness, autonomy, knowledge, and virtue) 2. Identify what is intrinsically bad (physical pain, mental anguish, sadistic impulses, and the betrayal of innocents) 3. Determine all your options |
| Finding out how something is optimific: (4-5) | 4. Determine the value of its results (option's results) 5. Pick the action that yields the greatest net balance of good over bad |
| What is ethical egoism a form of? | Consequentialism |
| Act utilitarianism | ONLY WELL-BEING IS INTRINSICALLY VALUABLE, so that act is morally right just because it maximizes overall well-being |
| Principle of utility | action is morally right if it is the best option |
| John Stuart Mill (1806-1872): | one of the greatest utilitarians/Create greatest good for greatest number/right thing to do does not rely on bigger population/Right answer doesn't rely on happier approach |
| Utilitarians is a doctrine of: | moral flexibility/can break traditional moral rules |
| Slippery slope argument: | criticize certain social innovations on the grounds that allowing them will lead to terrible things in the long run |
| How to know If an action is morally required: | 1. Add up benefit 2. Add up harm 3. Determine balance 4. See if balance is greater |
| Argument from value measurement: | 1. utilitarianism is true only if there is a unit of measurement 2. No such unit of measurement exists 3. Utilitarianism is false |
| 3 demands of utilitarianism: | Deliberation, Motivation, Action |
| Deliberation | how fast can I think? / Common wisdom, religion, past experience |
| Motivation | am I really supposed to be a saint? / Standard of rightness: rule give conditions to determine moral (idk what the word here was) / Decision pro method to action |
| Action | can I perform? |
| Problems of injustice | 1. The correct moral theory wouldn't call for injustice 2. utilitarianism sometimes requires #15 3. utilitarianism is false |
| Rule Consequentialism: | Action is right if required and accepted by society and results an optimific |
| What is an optimific rule? | 1. Describe said rule 2. Imagine society if we all accepted 3. Will society be better off |
| Intrinsic | good in-and-of-itself |
| Instrumental | good because it leads to some other good |
| Autonomy | in charge of yourself |
| Tests: | 1. What if everyone did that (if everyone did an action and it has a poor outcome, it means it's immoral) 2. Golden Rule (treat others how you wish to be treated) |
| Problems: | 1. The action that causes a problem does not mean it is immoral (homosexuality + celibacy) 2. It goes off peoples' desires (masochist likes being hit -> means everyone "should" get hit) |
| Maxim | the principle of action you give yourself when you are about to do something/States what you are about to do and why you are about to do it |
| Universalizable | if everyone were to do something and it has a good outcome with no contradictions/maxims lead to this |
| What was Kant's belief with immorality? | it is irrational |
| Argument for the Irrationality of Immorality | 1. If rational then consistent 2. If consistent, then obey principle of universalizability 3. If obey principles, then you act morally 4. Therefore, if you are rational, you act morally 5. Therefore, if you act immorally, then you are irrational |
| Hypothetical imperatives: | command us to do whatever is needed in order to get what we care about |
| Maxims | 1. Intended action 2. Reason for action ex: wanting to lose weight -> not eating favorite icecream |
| Categorial imperative: | command us to do things whether we want to do it or not ex: telling a murderer the truth about someone they're after instead of lying and keeping the victim safe (lying is immoral and KANT GOES BY THIS) |
| What kind of belief did Kant have? | absolute |
| Problems with Kant's absolute belief | Moral duties might conflict with other moral duties -> can't be absolute |
| Kant | Good Will/Duty (doing things/your motive is what your duty is) -> should apply to everyone (universalizability) |
| Imperative (Kant) | Do This! |
| Hypothetical (Kant) | If you want some outcome, then do x (contingent) |
| Categorial (Kant) | Do x (regardless if you want to) (necessary) |
| Deontology | Kant + categorial |
| Rationality | instrumental reason (most benefit for least cost) / intrinsic +absolute -> structure of the universe -> deepest nature (humanity) |
| Self-contradictory | if everyone did this and it caused a problem, it is irrational -> immoral (cannot cause problems/contradiction) / A &~ A / Not about the consequences -> about the fact that it's a problem |
| Enslavement | this is a violation of autonomy/humanity |
| Paternalism | treating someone as unfit to govern themselves -> "infantilizing" (because they are not able to subject one's ends to critical scrutiny) |
| Hobbes (1588-1679) | "the condition of man… is a condition of war" / Psychological egoism (motivated by self-interest) |
| Locke (1632-1704) | "no one ought to harm another in his life, liberty, or possessions" / Natural Law or Law of Nature |
| Rousseau (1712-1778) | "man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains" / General Will -> Body vs. Politic / Private Will vs Will of All |
| Rawls (1921-2002) | "justice as fairness" / Game Theory -> Ideal Theory (Procedural Account) -> veil of ignorance -> what would be consecutes to if we were free, rational, + equal |
| Carole Pateman (1940-Present) | "the original pact is sexual as well as a social contract" |
| Charles Mills (1951-2021) | "the idealized social contract renders permanent the legacy of the Racial Contract" / Epistemology of ignorance |
| Social Contract Theory | Agreement between government and the people (Voluntary agreement to be governed) / Respect / Roles + duties / If you violate it, you are not protected by social contract anymore (laws + punishment) |
| Contract | Exchange rights + obligations (liberties/duties) |
| State of Nature | life outside of any governing authority (pre-social condition) / No laws, government, social contract / Dangerous in the eyes of Hobbes (because self-interest) |
| Human Nature | Self-interested -> contract is in our interests / We're all equally vulnerable (relative equality) |
| When did human private property come about? | After social contracts |
| What should we do to better society? | give up our interests and some of our desires |
| Morality is a what? | social phenomenon |
| What should you do if you do not like a social contract? | Not join it, try to leave it |
| Rawls (further descriptions) | keeps account of human nature (what is just is what a rational person WOULD choose from an original position of equality) / veil of ignorance |
| Veil of Ignorance | you should be ignorant of: class/race (social position), psychological dispositions, and vision of "the good" (autonomy) |
| Distribution of Social Goods | material goods, non-material goods (rights), institutional access / ex: education (autonomy, citizenship, access to "good" employment, and status) |
| Moral of Social Contract Theory | good/bad are a matter of convention, but from a position of rationality and equality |
| Consent | Laws/Morality are legitimized by this (voluntary (coercion) (rational -> autonomy) |
| Tacit Consent | failure to oppose or withdraw consent |
| Why can leaving a social contract be difficult? | Disobedience can be dangerous: can cause despair, imprisonment, and death |
| The account of rationality is what? | Particular (not universable) |
| Desert | what people deserve (just distributions give people what they deserve) |
| How to know if you deserve something: | If it was stolen, if you got it fairly, if you use poorly attained resources, success, effort |
| Does individuality equal individualism | Not particularly |
| Individualism | to have "your own" uniqueness in contrast to the community (doing whatever you want, are you truly unique if you have shared interests?) |
| SCT (Social Contract Theory) | we are motivated by self-interest / State of Nature / Individual is logically prior to the social / "I am because we are" -> social is prior |
| Ìwà | existence (to appear/emerge) -> act of being (Primary) / character -> "who you are" (Derivative) (Adornment) / (virtues/vices) (norms of behavior -> habits, learning from others, trauma (events)) |
| Practical Wisdom | developed through practice / you understand it through APPLYING it |
| What does virtue ethics tell you? | HOW you gain moral wisdom/understanding |
| Eudaimonia | happiness as pleasure ("good life", "flourishing") / overcoming challenges to gain what is worthwhile |
| Is virtue enough for eudaimonia? | No, you need happiness and virtue to live a "good life" (self-sufficient, human, intrinsically valuable) |
| What are rules for? | They are like a training wheel for the real world. Once you understand them, you use them to begin thinking on your own. |
| Consequentialism (Rationality) | max desires and decrease cost / pleasure in general, NOT JUST MINE (universal (utilitarian)) / who has rights: anyone (or any animal) who can suffer harm |
| Kant (Rationality) | duty / a priori / autonomy / who has rights: anyone who is rational and autonomous |
| Social Contract Theory (Rationality) | instrumental / max desires / self-interest / who has rights: anyone whose interests are protected by the rules that contractors will agree on |
| Virtue Ethics (Rationality) | using rationality to be virtuous (BE A VIRTUOUS PERSON) / thinking with good reasoning / aiding others / moral exemplar / figure things out for ourselves, through reflection, discussion, and experience (PRACTICE) / emotions and their role |
| Moral Exemplar | someone who sets a fine example and serves as a role model |
| Tragic Dilemma | if given a terrible situation, try to find the best outcome even if it is hurtful (as long as it prevents the MOST harm) |
| How Emotions can help: | can help with finding out what is morally relevant, moral solutions, and motivation to do the right thing |
| Community | fitting in and helping those in your community / mandatory to aid others so you'll have the same treatment for yourself (do as you'd expect to be treated) (you have a role) |
| Relationship to virtue ethics: | how to gain moral wisdom/understanding / strive to improve (no true winning) / live a "good life" (through virtue and happiness to reach eudaumonia) |
| Implicit Consent | when action or inaction implies you consent to something (“if you ask a server at a restaurant to bring you a hamburger, it says “$5” on the menu, and they bring you one, you have implicitly agreed to pay that amount for it.”) / tacit consent |
| Tacit Consent | consent expressed through silence and a lack of opposition to the government |
| Explicit Consent | verbally/clearly saying and confirming your consent (“you say, “I will give you $5 for a hamburger”, and they bring you one, you have explicitly agreed to pay that amount for it.”) |
| Problems with SCT | immoral actions could be rational / if you violate SCT, you are no longer protected by it / free-rider problem / fear of voicing opinion / contractors that make contracts can disagree / contractarianism offers NO SECURE PROTECTION for the TRULY VULNERABLE |
| Free-rider problem | those who refuse to help as long as enough people are chipping in and everyone can benefit from it (free ride by exploiting others) |
| Who are the truly vulnerable? | The only ones who can enter a social contract are contractors / The weak (infants, the severely mentally disabled, etc.), animals, and plants (ecosystems) cannot be members / They are exploited by not getting anything in return |
Created by:
edandromeda
Popular Miscellaneous sets