Quiz 2 - Mackie, Hume, & Euthyphro

Mackie’s argument from disagreement

1. There is an enormous amount of moral disagreement 

2. these disagreements are usually hard to solve 

3. the best explanation for this state of affairs is that there are no objective moral truths 

_____________________________________________________

CON: there are no objective moral truths 

Mackie’s argument from queerness: METAPHYSICAL VERSION

1. if objective moral properties existed, they would be really werid entities unlike anything else we’re familiar with in the universe

2. that’s too bizarre to believe

_______________________________________________

CON: moral properties don’t exist

Mackie’s argument from queerness: EPISTEMOLOGICAL VERSION

1. if objective moral properties existed, we would need some special sense to see them

2. we don’t have any such sense

_______________________________________________________

CON: there’s no reason to think they exist

Objections to the argument from queerness (2)

1. as humans, we DO have a moral sense

2. bizarre things CAN exist

Hume’s simple argument (WORD FORM)

Ideas = thoughts & reason which tell us if its true or false

AND 

Impressions: sensory info which lead us to actions 

Hume’s argument PART 1

1. reason doesn’t excite or produce passions or actions

           a. reason tells us whether things are true or not 

           b. feelings / actions are not things that can be true or false 

___________________________________________________________

CON 1: feelings / actions are not objects of reason 

2. moral judgements do not excite passions & actions (motive internalism)

___________________________________________________________

CON 2: morality is not a matter of reason 

OVERALL CON: moral judgements have properties that reason does not. therefore, they’re not the same thing

Hume’s argument PART 2

1. vice and virtue are not matters of fact 

2. reason only deals with matters of fact 

____________________________________________________

CON: morality is not a matter of reason 

Hume’s argument’s OVERALL CONCLUSION

Morality is a matter of impressions, more specifically, our own feelings

subjective descriptionism

cognitivism is true, and what makes our moral judgements true or false is our own feelings / attitudes towards the object of our judgement

impressions

the immediate, lively and forceful perception we have while experiencing something directly

ideas

depends on a prior impression 

• faint copies of impression connected with thing and reason

“is” statement

statement of fact & description of how the world “is”

“ought” statement

normative or perspective statements with judgements on how the world SHOULD be

1. what what OUGHT to do

2. driven by feelings & passions

divine command theory 

an act is morally right just because it is commanded by God & immoral because God forbids it 

core question of Euthyphro & Socrates argument

what is piety?

• Socrates wants a universal definition of piety, NOT just examples

Refined definition of piety

piety is what all the gods love, and impiety is what all the gods hate

The Euthyphro Dilemma MODERN FORM

Is something good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is already good?

“don’t grab a bull by the horns” analogy

a dilemma or situation where a person faces a choice between two options and each option has significant problems or undesirable consequences

The Euthyphro Argument: Russ Schafer Landau reconstruction

1. Either God has reasons that support His commands, or God lacks

reasons for His commands.

2. If God lacks reasons for His commands, then God's commands are

arbitrary and that renders God imperfect, undermining His moral authority.

3. If God has reasons that support His commands, then these reasons,

rather than the divine commands, are what make actions right or

wrong thereby refuting the divine command theory.

4. Therefore, either God is imperfect, or the divine command theory

is false.

5. God is not imperfect.

______________________________________________________

CON: Therefore, the divine command theory is false.

religion as a moral guidance (2 ways)

1. God could guide morality like a flawless thermometer, reporting truths with creating them

2. An act is morally required if God commands it & is immoral is God forbids it

Horn 1 

God commands what is already good 

• role as a moral expert

Who believes in Horn 1?

Socrates, Euthyphro, Islam, Catholicism

Horn 2 (DCT)

God’s commands MAKE things good

Who supports Horn 2?

Scotus, Ockham, Descartes, Hobbes, Luther, Calvin, Protestants

religious belief & moral motivation

some argue that belief in god is needed for morality, since fear of punishment or hope of reward motivates good behavior

3 problems with religious beliefs as moral motivation

1. being conscious doesn’t always mean being good

2. usefulness does not equal truth

3. acting from fear / desire for reward undermines moral worth (true morality is doing whats right for its own sake)