Moral Philly (2)

Bible & Faith

Harder to Prove God’s Commands than God Exists

Thousands of Interpretations of What God Commands

Use Intuition to Sift Through What Is/Isn’t God

But Intuition isn’t Really Knowledge (No Justification)

Believing the Bible contains God’s commands is a Master of Faith. And Faith is belief w/o Sufficient Justification

Faith in God’s Commands in the Bible isn’t Knowledge About What is Moral or immoral

DVC Not TruthMaker

DVC isn’t the kind of truthmaker ethicist are looking for

God commanded x, is only a truthmaker for god commanded something. Not that x is moral.

God is all-good, infer it’s moral (but that’s not why god chose to command, that’s not a reason ti’s moral)

If the president is infallible on legal knowledge and says pirating a DVD of a movie you own is illegal, then you can infer it’s illegal, but it doesn’t explain why.

Feels like we can actually debate the merits of something being wrong or not (not commanded or forbidden)

If dvc is correct, then it’d be impossible for morality to predate a Judeo-Christian God, but it does.

Mystery & Magic

Fallacy of the Filing in our Explanatory Gaps w/ God

Mystery, therefor,e Magic Fallacy: Interjecting a favorite Supernatural Explanation for something not explained

If no Natural Explanation: It must be supernatural

Cratylus says “God Did It” is an excuse for not having any evidence at all. It’s an appeal to ignorance fallacy.

Similarly, “God did it” falls short as a moral explanation

Finding a truthmaker for moral statements is tricky, but that’s no reason to give up & invoke the supernatural

Hedonism

Consequentialism - Truthmaker is in consequences

Epicurus proposes Hedonism - pleasure & a lack of pain is the only intrinsic good (good for its own sake)

Class>Degree>Job>$>House/Cars/Family>Happy

Everything Else is a Means to be Happy or Avoid Pain

“Pleasure is the starting point of every choice…the rule by which to judge of every good thing.”

Moral Truthmaker: Facts of Pain/Pleasure

Epicurus

“By pleasures we mean the absence of pain not drinking bouts, not sexual lust.” Get Rid of Bodily Desire = Happy

Pleasures w/ No Downside, Friendship & Knowledge

“Death is nothing…since when we are, death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.”

Objections

While Epicurus’s Hedonism is not Short-Sighted & looks to Long-Term Overall Happiness, it still faces Objections

B/c it’s only about one’s own pleasure, it can be acceptable to sacrifice to the happiness of others

For example, you’re not obligated to care for Elderly Parents, if it’d lead to a Less Happy Overall Life

Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) Quantitative Utilitarianism

Such Objections led Jeremy Bentham to develop Utilitarianism

Agreed with Epicurus, Happiness is an Intrinsic Good & Pain, Intrinsic Evil. Morality Determined by Happiness

“We have two sovereign masters: pain & pleasure”

Greates Happiness Maxim: “It’s the Greatest Happiness of the Greatest Number that’s the measure of right & wrong.”

Hedonic Calculus: Extent, Intensity, Duration, Proximity, Fecundity, Purity & Certainty

Quantitative Utilitarianism b/c it adds up the number of happy and pain people to determine Moral Truth.

John Stuart Mill

Mill argued Bentham Missed important distinction

Lower pleasures of sensation: Food, sex, fun, etc.

Higher pleasures of intellect: Beethoven, Shakespeare, Math, Rescuing Girl from Building, etc.

Agreed: Greatest Amount of Happiness Altogether.

Pleasure Should not Depend on Quantity Alone.

Higher Determined by those who’ve Experienced Both

Only When Higher & Lower Forms are in Competition

Example: 6 out of 8 Soldiers Die Saving Private Ryan, the last of 4 sons who were shipped off to WWII. (A Quantitatively Bad Decision, but Qualitatively Good).

Objections

(1) After Action X, One can Tally the Happiness Caused But Can’t Tally the Happiness of NOT Doing Action X Greatest Happiness Truthmaker Depends on Counterfactuals

(2) Predicting Future Long Term Consequnces is Hard

(3) Happiness Doesn’t Come in Hedons (Quantifiable Pleasure Unites) Difficult to Predict on Big Important Decisions

(4) “X” = 100 - Happy/50 - Pain vs. “X” 10 Happy/5-Pain “-X” Causes Less Pain than “X” (but while “X” causes more pleasure, it also causes More pain), then what?

Tomorrow Battle to Destroy or Save Humankind. Secret agent Puts Minefield to Blow Up Enemy Army. But loses Remote Detonator. Next day, while running away, cowardly soldier steps on detonator, saved the entire world, more happiness. But not moral action

“The Lottery” Shirley Jackson, Stone One Harvest.

The majority Happier by enslaving minority of people problem is happiness is not the only good (Also fairness, justice, promises, roles, rights, etc.)

Civil rest by blaming an innocent person of crime

Objections

To get Best Consequences, Rules Need Exceptions

Don’t kill (except in Self-Defense)

But Exceptions, Open the Floodgates. “Don’t Kill except when it promotes Happiness

Rule Utilatrianism Allows the Same as Act Utilitarianism

Don’t Enslave People, Unless they’re of Race X (Exception Makes it Wrong)

Decline a Rule in So many Ways: (1) When there’s an Opportunity to Smoke Pot, you Should. (2) When there’s an opportunity to take any illegal drug, you should. (3) Only when you’re at this Party, you should.

You can Manipulate the Rule to Serve whatever Whim you Want.

Rule Utilitarianism just collapses into Act Utilitarianism

Experience Machine

Robert Norick’s Experience-Machine Thought Experiment

Machine provides lifetime of pleasurable experiences

Fake life that feels real in a stimulated world

Choosing to hook up should maximize happiness

But there’s no ultimate value in living a fictitious life

T Belief is a Real World is Intrinsically Valuable

Even if ignorance is Bliss, it shouldn’t be previewed.

Utilatarianism seems to miss out on these other Goods.

Richard Brandt (1910-1997) & Brad Hooker (1957-Present)

Rule Utilitarianism

Brandt & Hooker Distinguish Act vs. Rule Utilitarianism

Act Utilitarianism says that if you give money to poor person that gets wasted & kills, then its morally wrong that you gave charity to a poor person.

Rule Utilitarianism says your act should follow the rule that if consistently followed, maximizes happiness

If everyone gave consistently to poor it’d maximize happiness, so since this once it backfired doesnt matter

Violating justice, fairness, rights & obligations consistently would lead to less happiness overall

Virtue Ethics (VE)

is not Concerned with what makes an Action Morally Good, but w/ a Person Morally Good.

The advantage of VE is would not have to figure out rule to solve every obscure hypothetical problem

We could just become a kind of person that can figure out the right action in problematic situations

Real life is too complicated for action-based theories

If you become a real virtuous person (e.g, Mr. Rogers), then you’ll just know instinctively what to do in those situations.

How Ought We to Live

“Virtue Ethics” by Anscombe, “Modern Moral Philosophy”

Anscombe Suggests a Return to Aristotle

A good person causes a good life (then, good actions are automatic)

2 Prerequisites: Virtue (Arete) & Practical Wisdom (Phronest)

& w/ Arete & Phronesis, you can accomplish Eudaimonia

Virtue: One’s Fullest Potential. Propensity of Excellence

Aristotle, St. Aquinas, André Compte-Sponville (Polite, Mercy, Purity, Good Faith, Prudence, Courage, Justice, Generosity, Compassion, Gratitude, Humility, Simplicity, Tolerance, Gentleness, Love)

Golden mean between lack & Excess

Courage is Mean (Cowardice=Lack, Recklessness=Excess)

And Saving People for Fame & Glory is not Heroic

Must Practice Virtues, Surrounded w/ Heroes, Through Imitation we make Virtues an Instinct in Us

Rosaline Hursthouse (1942-present)

“Honesty is to be someone who recognizes honesty as valuable, and who understands that something’s being true is a strong reason to prefer it. It’s associated with honest people, encourages honesty in others, and pities those who succeed because of dishonesty. It’s value honesty down to your core. You may not even value honesty by name or even have the concept in mind as you act, but as long as you value what we’d call honesty down to your core, you are honest.”

Habit Problem (Robert C. Roberts) (1942-Present)

Obj: If Heroic Virtuous Person Just Acts Instictively

Doesn’t it seem that the nonvirtuous person who struggles to the right thing deserves more credit than the heroic virtuous person that does it by habit

Roberts “Willpower and the virtues” 2 kinds of credit

Moral credit for veterans who do it automatically

Moral credit for newcomers who struggle w/ willpower

Struggling w/ willpower is part of moral training

Praiseworthy internal struggle (soldier should have mixed-feeling about taking the life of an enemy soldier)

They should value life in general (including their own)

Practical Wisdom (Phronesis) (Aristotle) (384-322 BCE)

However, Possessing the Virtues isn’t Enough.

Virtue requires what Aristotle calls Phronensis.

Combining Honesty w/ Practical Wisdom means you know to even Cleverly lie to the Murderer.

& Being Virtuous is Possesing the Intellectual Virtues (Intellectual Humility, Honesty, Valuing Intrinsic Truth)

Phronesis Prevents You from Being Virtuous to a Fault (Being Too Generous & Family Falling into Abject Poverty)

Unfortunately, Intelligence/Determination used for Evil (Courages Suicide Bomber, but Cause isn’t Virtuous)

You need the means to be charitable

Rosaline Hursthouse (1942-Present)

Practical Wisdom comes through Life Experience

Life Teaches Us What Sort of things Work

Practical wisdom is something children often alck

Imagine a friend that’s going through a painful divorce

Your daughter offers her frozen dvd to console her

Daughter can’t be faulted, life hasn’t taught her phronesis

Adults sometimes lack phronesis & they’re morally deficient

So, practical wisdom is necessary to live well.

But, what is it to live a truly amazing life?

Eudaimonia (Aristotle The Nicomachean Ethics)

Happiness is an ineadequate transaltion of eudaimonia

It’s not fleeting the feeling of Bliss (objective not subjective)

You can think you’re healthy, but objectively you’re not. Liewise, you can think you’re happy but you’re not

It’s not flourishing. Well-being is accurate, but uninformative

Aristotle: fulfilling one’s function is eudaimonia

A hammer’s unique function is to drive nails

A human’s unique function is to reason well

So, a good human is one that learns to reason well

Other Views (Annette Baier) (1929-2012)

For Aristotle, Eudaimonia Requires Luck

Stoics: Eudaimonia is Accepting Misfortunes Stoicaly

Annette Baier “Postures of the Mind” (1985)

Feminists argue that Aristotle is Too Masculine

Emphasizes Cold Virtues: Justice, Fairness & Autonomy

Neglects Feminine Virtues: Caring, Patience, Nurturing & Self-Sacrifice.

Feminists Say the Utilitarian Calculus of Choosing 20 Strangers' Happiness Over your own childs is ridiculous

It’s morally preferable to save your child over 20 strangers from an oncoming train.

Moral Exemplars

Lina Zagzebski (“Examplars Virtue Theory”)

To discern the virtues, we can look to moral exemplars

Surround ourselves with Heroes & emulate them

Look at the virtues that the Moral Exemplars Embody

Moral Exemplars can be Fictional (The Virtuous Batman)

Even emulating a fictional hero can make you more virtuous

Objections (Michael Stocker 1944-Present) (Christopher Toner 1973-Present)

Obj 1: We can’t identify the Moral Exemplars w/o knowing the virtues, & we can’t identify the Virtues w/o identifying the moral exemplars. Circular Fallacy

Michael Stocker’s “The Schizophrenia of Modern Ethical Theories”

You visit a friend in the hospital b/c you care, not b/c it’s what a virtuous person would do, or because God told you to, or produces the Greatest Happiness for the Greatest Number, or b/c the Categorical Imperative

Christopher Toner says Virtue Ethics is Self-Centered

But it Underestimates How Other-Centered Virtues Are

Caring about them means it’s other-centered

Free will

Obj 2: Of course, Virtue Ethics says that people who aren’t virtuous are morally blameworthy

What about those who lack access to Moral Exemplars?

Not everyone has an equal opportunity to be virtuous.

If our desire to be virtuous is a product of our Genetics & upbringing, then we can’t be morally blamed for being unvirtuous

Distinguish morally blameworthy vs. Morally deficient

Or embrace compatibilism & say that we’re free and morally responsible as long as our actions spring from our learned wants, desires, reason, & our logic/phronesis

Instead of trying to the right kind of actions, virtue ethics focuses on becoming the right kind of person

Then your virtuousness leads to a life most worth living