Moral Philosophy Midterm

morality

a set of norms and principles that govern our actions with respect to each other and which are taken to have a special kind of weight or authority

normative

questions about what people should do, what behavior is morally right and wrong, which actions are permitted or prohibited

prescriptive

primarily concerned with what should or ought to be done

the fact-value distinction 

is a philosophical concept that differentiates between factual statements, which can be empirically verified, and normative statements, which express values or judgments about what ought to be.

normative ethics & descriptive ethics

• moral philosophy deals with informative dimensions of ethical inquiry

• moral philosophy is concerned with the mental processes related to ethics, such as personality + character

• descriptive ethics describes the moral code, value systems, and belief in different societies

ought problem

David Hume (1711-1776) ethical judgements (ought statements) cannot be derived from purely descriptive factual statements

naturalistic fallacy

something is natural, therefore, it is morally acceptable or good

value judgements 

• evaluative statements which determine some action to possess a particular kind of moral value

• values are distinct from mere preferences 

etymology

• ethics comes from Greek “ethos”, referring to someone’s character or disposition

• morality comes from Latin’s “moralis”, meaning mannerisms or character traits

moral agents

beings whose actions are subject to moral consideration

moral patients

beings who themselves are the moral concern of others

obligatory actions

one which you ought to do if possible; there is an imperative (moral responsibility) to complete this action

permitted actions

ones which can be performed without violating any moral imperative 

logic

• philosophers don’t just make assertions, but give arguments for their views

• needs to be same way of addressing the quality of an argument

• studies the structure of arguments

arguments

1. a conclusion: a statement which is trying to be proven

2. premises: statements which are given as evidence or support for the conclusion

validity

formal property of an argument

• if the premises are true and the conclusion follows from the premises, the conclusion must be true

• philosophers want ways of consistently deriving true conclusions from existing premises and having arguments which follow good principles of reasoning

• doesn’t mean valid arguments will always have true premises

sound argument

valid argument will all true premises

invalid arguments

can have true conclusions, but don’t guaranteed them

testing for invalidity

• shows that a particular argument firm can have true premises and a false conclusion

common logical mistakes 

• just because a conclusion is true, doesn’t mean the reasoning to get there is solid

• invalid arguments can often look similar to valid ones 

• just because an argument is valid doesn’t mean that you have to accept the conclusion there may be a false premise 

tautology

a statement which is always true

contradiction

something that is always false

deductive reasoning 

if valid logical deductions are employed and the premises are true, the conclusion follows with absolute certainty

inductive reasoning

conclusions are arrived at based on how probable they are - more observations can be done to confirm or disprove theories and generalizations

common law

based on the precedent of prior cases; general principles is derived from the consitent patterns of previous rulings

civil law 

based on legal codes; specific rulings are the application of general legal principles to a particular case 

quantifiers

• All S is P

• No S is P

• Some S is P

• Some S is not P

• all and no are known as universal; some and some…is not are known as particular

• all and some are known as affirmative; no and some…is not are known as negative

syllogism

All humans are mortal. major premise

Socrates is a human minor premise

Therefore, Socrates is mortal. Conclusion

• All M are P

• Some S is M

• Therefore, some S is P

• this is valid

formal fallacy 

an invalid deduction within an argument - these are issues in the reasoning being employed 

informal fallacies

steps in reasoning that may be formally valid, but are nevertheless rationally unpersuasive - informal fallacies can be understood as a mishandling of the content of an argument’s propositions

virtue ethics

• the primary subject of morality is an individual’s character

• virtues are character traits that dispose us to act well in some domain of life

• a good person is someone who lives virtuously - being someone who possess and lives the virtues

• concerned with the whole of a person’s life, rather than particular episodes or actions

why do we fall short of perfect virtue?

• we may be ignorant of what it means to be properly virtuous

• we may not know how to apply virtues properly in a given situation

• our circumstances may make it difficult to be virtuous 

• we may have a weakness of will (temptations of conflicting desires) 

How do we become virtuous?

Greek - city states were concerned about ensuring their leaders’ ability to act morally and perform their duties well

• chosen by lottery system

Four general positions:

1. virtue is innate and present from birth

2. virtue can be taught like any other technical skill

3. virtue can be learned through imitation and practice (most virtue ethicists will take this position)

4. virtue is only granted by the gods

practical wisdom (phronesis)

the person who is “honest to a fault” is someone who may lack practical wisdom

moral exemplars

an individual whose character expresses virtue to an exceptional degree 

Natural Law

1. what did medieval people think about nature?

2. what is meant when they speak about laws

relationships between philosophy + sacred scripture

Nature as divine creation

all 3 major Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) agreed that God was the creator of the world

The Great Chain of Being 

nature is in a hierarchical order with God at the top

• everything has its proper place and purpose determined by God

• world is relatively unchanging once created - God created a stable universe 

• the world is fundamentally good - God would not create a flawed or evil world 

• all creatures depend on God to exist, but God exists independently from the world 

• humans occupy a special place in nature 

Divine Providence

if the world is designed by God + all things in it have a purpose, then there is some sort of overarching plan for the world - this is what is meant by Providence

key differences between this and modern ideas about nature

• nature is not dynamic or evolving

  • god is always involved in nature

• humans have minimal power over nature

  • humans are small players within a much larger cosmic story

• all things are part of a carefully ordered hierarchy

Medieval Education

produce literate people + competing groups in society

monastery schools - christian

madrasas - islamic

yeshivas - jewish

anthropology 

not the modern academic discipline, but rather “what does it mean to be a human being?”

• all human beings possess an immortal soul

• human nature is the product of God’s wisdom and careful design 

• humans have free will which makes us morally responsible

• animals and plants are not moral agents because they lack free will, reason, etc

social animals

human society was seen as a mirror of divine creation

• hierarchically ordered into hereditary castes - who you are is determined by the role you are born into - an order which is right, just, and ordained by God

• King as the symbol or representation of God on Earth- rules over his domain just as God rules over the whole cosmos

• every individual plays a role in society which is in service of the greater social good

Eternal Law

the rational plan by which all creation is ordered; eternal, unchanging, and universal; it is the law as it exists in the mind of God

Natural Law

laws governing life on Earth; more specifically, how human beings fit within the eternal law; the “respective inclinations to the proper acts and ends” for human beings 

Divine Law

laws given to humanity via divine revelation; divided into the Old and New law

Human Law

laws that use human reason to adapt natural law to particular geographical, historical, and social circumstances

Natural Law and Virtue Ethics Overlap

• both see human life as inherently end-directed; people pursue the good of human life, which is happiness/eudaemonia

• virtues contribute to the perfection of human nature while vices are contrary to our ultimate happiness

• what is good is determined by nature; human values are predetermined by our nature, but will vary based on our particular circumstance 

Natural Law and Virtue Ethics Divergence

• virtue ethics is concerned with the individual (personal character) while natural law is concerned with the collective (humanity as a whole, political community)

• natural law has a theory of rights - things which we are entitled to by law in virtue of our humanity - which is not present in virtue ethics

• natural law is rule based while virtue ethics is character based