Intro to Ethics: Exam 4

noble savage (thinker)

Rousseau

version if state of nature (thinker)

Rousseau

version of state of war (thinker)

Rousseau

pity (thinker)

Rousseau

general will (thinker)

Rousseau

civil religion (thinker)

Rousseau

harm principle (thinker)

Mill

self-regarding actions (thinker)

Mill

other-regarding actions (thinker)

Mill

paternalism (thinker)

Mill

harm vs offense (thinker)

Mill

freedom of speech (thinker)

Mill

liberties defended by… (thinker)

Mill

physical coercion (thinker)

Mill

moral coercion (thinker)

Mill

living truth (thinker)

Mill

dead dogma (thinker)

Mill

intellectual courage (thinker)

Mill

tyranny of majority (thinker)

Mill

political liberalism (thinker)

Rawls

comprehensive doctrines (thinker)

Rawls

overlapping consensus (thinker)

Rawls

reasonable pluralism (thinker)

Rawls

neutrality of aim (thinker)

Rawls & Rodeiro

neutrality of effect (thinker)

Rawls & Rodeiro

ecocide (thinker)

Rodeiro

autarkic citizens (thinker)

Rodeiro

roving citizens (thinker)

Rodeiro

eco-relational pluralism (thinker)

Rodeiro

noble savage

everyone is individual in SofN; primitive with virtues (ex. strong, happy, confident)

R’s State of Nature

no gov’t; everyone is a noble savage; nature is abundant

R’s State of War

conflict between the rich and poor; poor feel society is unfair so they become violent; French Revolution

pity

Hobbes’ version is missing this; people wouldn’t want to hurt other because they feel bad for them

general will

antidote to the state of war; collective interest of society

civil religion

religious holidays based on the state (ex. Thanksgiving)

harm principle

society is justified to control individuals only to prevent harm to others

self-regarding actions

something that directly affects you (sphere of individual liberties)

other-regarding actions

something that directly affects others

paternalism

gov’t for citizens own good (gov’t = father, citizens = children)

harm vs. offense

control of people to prevent harm but not to prevent being offensive

freedom of speech

expressing your opinions freely; don’t insight violence

liberties defended by Mill

freedom of speech, assembly, taste & pursuits, and action to a certain extent

physical coercion

violence (ex. jailing, capital punishment, police)

moral coercion

quietly disciplining you; follow the crowd; opinions of society

Mill is more concerned about ___ coercion than ___ coercion

moral; physical

living truth

collision of error; can only have this when society encourages debate

dead dogmas

prejudice; superstition; clinging to words

intellectual courage

question, refect, and express

tyranny of majority

protect minority speech against the majority

political liberalism

the book Rawls wrote

comprehensive doctrines

answers all of life’s questions (ex. religious texts)

overlapping consensus

different conceptions of good but everyone can agree on what is right

right is…

justice, public

good is…

morality, private

reasonable pluralism

diversity of thought, culture, tradition; can never be eliminated unless state becomes very oppressive

neutrality of aim

the state tries not to favor one reasonable conception of good over another; FEO

neutrality of effect

state is organized in such a way that the state has no effect on which doctrines people adopt

Rawls believes that neutrality of ___ is better than neutrality of ___

aim; effect

ecocide

destruction of nature has to be deliberate and undermines non-consenting citizens interests

autarkic citizens

live off the land; deeply connected to it; spiritual

roving citizens

less connected to the land; draw from lots of resources; depleting the resources

eco-relational pluralism

idea that there is diversity of how people relate to the world; the state should remain neutral (aim) in eco-relationality

main idea of the exam

priority of the right over good

“a clear perception of the truth is produced by its collision of error”

Mill

'“man is born free but everywhere else in chains”

Rousseau