Concepts of Human Nature

Argument Against the Experience Machine -

1. we want to do certain things and not just have the experience of doing them

2. we want to be a certain type of person and be a certain way

3. limits us to man-made reality

Nozicks experience Machine - plugged in to have any experience you desire, not aware of being in machine, could do anything in there but nothing in the real world

Chalmers reality machine - person can make choices within machine, you can interact with people also in machine, you know that you are in it

Chalmer and Artificial environments - 1. no reason to think artificial environments are any less valuable than nature ones

2. what is most important is that the experience is meaningful and gives us opportunity for growth and connection

Camus and the Absurd - paradoxical situation between our impulse to ask ultimate questions and the impossibility of achieving any adequate answer

nagel and the absurd - 1. the absurd comes from conflicts within us. the reflective capacity to view our lives from the outside is what generates the absurd

Myth of Sisyphus - boulder is so large that it cannot get to the stop so his labor has no point

taylor and "the meaning of life" - Meaning is subjective. What matters is the fit between what you want and what you do, not whether your action has external point

Wolfe- happiness and meaning - engagement alone is not enough for meaning. meaning has to have active engagement and genuine worth to be meaningful

Self-Transcendence - meaningful lives are those where we are drawn beyond our own interests toward something that genuinely matters

Meta-ethics - what is moral fundamentally?

Normative Ethics - What should we do and why?

Deontology - morality is about duties and rules that hold regardless of consequences. some actions are intrinsically right or wrong

Consquentialism - the moral worth of an action is determined entirely by its outcome. what matters is producing the best state of affairs

Utilitarianism - the right action maximizes overall happiness (utility)

MILL

Virtue ethics - morality is primarily about character ARISTOTLE

aristotle and virtue - a stable state of character determined by rational principle, involving a balance between excess and deficiency

doctrine of the mean - virtue lies between two extremes: a vice of excess and a vice of deficiency

How are virtues aquired - through habit and practice; they are learned rather than innate

why are humans responsible for their virtues - virtues are developed voluntarily through repeated actions, making us accountable for our character

what is happiness (eudaimonia) for aristotle? and how is "happiness" different from "eudaimonia" - rational activity in accordance with virtue

eudaimonia is closer to flouring or living well and is not a temporary feeling

human happiness vs. animal happiness - humans-rational activity

animals-lack rationality

main alternative views of happiness artistotle considers and rejects - wealth: pursued for sake of something else

honor: depends on others opinions

pleasure: shared with animals and is not uniquely human

criterion of finality - the highest good must be chosen for its own sake, not for something else

criterion of self-sufficiency - the highest good must make life complete and lacking in nothing

Aristotle's function argument - something is good if it performs its function well: paring knife example

distinctive function of humans - rational activity

Doctrine of the Mean - Virtue lies between excess and deficiency.

an arithmetic mean and why is it insufficient for ethics - fixed midpoint between two extremes and it is purely mathematical and does not account for real situations

mean relative to us - the appropriate response for a particular person in a specific situation, guided by reason

why is virtue difficult according to the doctrine of the mean - there are many ways to go wrong (excess/deficiency) but only one way to go right

how does the doctrine of the mean help define moral virtue? - it shows that virtue is not rule-following but is cultivated ability to respond appropriately across situations

"doing virtuous things" and "doing virtuous things virtuously" - first is a correct outward action and the second includes the right internal motivations and character

why is correct action alone insufficient for virtue - because virtue requires both the right action and the right intension

Aristole's three internal conditions for virtuous action - knowledge, choice, stable character