Ethics Test 2
C.S. Lewis “Eros”
What is eros?
The state of being in love and that it entails (beyond mere sexuality, which can exist without eros; infatuation/delighted preoccupation with the Beloved; promises fidelity which cannot be self-sustained)
What are the elements of eros?
Appreciative Love (most active in eros, loving the Beloved in themselves), Gift Love (easy self-sacrifice, sees Beloved as an extension of self, not entirely selfless), Need Love (present but transitory, quickly becomes Appreciative or Gift Love)
What is Venus? How is it related to eros?
Venus is the term Lewis uses to express a sexual relationship, which can be present both with and without eros
How is eros different from friendship, affection, and charity?
Eros does not require virtue and is exclusive by nature (its lack of virtue makes it unstable when it is alone)
Friendship is more closely tied to one’s character and is open by nature
What are the dangers of eros?
We might begin to treat eros like a god, and this would result in us being in love with eros itself or we may allow eros to cloud better reason and judgment.
Can eros sustain a relationship? What else is needed?
It cannot sustain a relationship without other elements of love, such as friendship and charity. Eros comes and goes and therefore is not able to sustain anything long-term.
What is the relationship between eros and happiness?
Eros is a promise of eternal faithfulness to another and is unconcerned with our own happiness (sub-rational love: not something we choose; we don’t decide who we fall in love with). It does not necessarily lead to happiness.
Plato, Symposium .
How do each of the speakers define eros?
Phaedrus - Love is virtue
Pausanias - Heavenly (desire for virtue) vs Common (desire for the body)
Eryximachus - Love is and brings harmony
Aristophanes - Love is a pursuit of wholeness of the self and is rare to find
Agathon - Love is always good and beautiful; discusses Eros as the god and eros as the effects of the god on human beings
Socrates - Love is the desire for what is beautiful and good and is not innately good nor bad
Diotima - Eros is the desire to possess the good forever
How does each speaker deal with pederasty (man-boy love)? Is it a legitimate part of eros for each speaker?
Phaedrus - “I cannot say what greater good there is for a young boy than a gentle lover, or for a lover than a boy to love.” (178C), “[The gods] are more impressed and delighted, however, and are more generous with a loved one who cherishes his lover, than with a lover who cherishes the boy he loves. A lover is more godlike than his boy, you see, since he is inspired by a god.” (180B)
Pausanias - “Contrast [common Aphrodite’s love] with the Love of Heavenly Aphrodite. This goddess, whose descent is purely male (hence this love is for boys) is considerably older and therefore free from the lewdness of youth. That’s why those who are inspired by her Love are attracted to the male: they find pleasure in what is by nature stronger and more intelligent.” (181C)
Eryximachus - Does not mention pederasty in his own speech, but does make a reference to Pausanias’ speech in stating “[…] it is as honorable to yield to a good man as it is shameful to consort with the debauched […] (186C)
Aristophanes - “People who are split from a male are male-oriented. While they are boys, because they are chips off the male block, they love men and enjoy lying with men and being embraced by men; these are the best of boys and lads, because they are the most manly in their nature.” (192A)
Agathon - Does not mention pederasty in his speech
Socrates - His speech asserts that love is the desire for that which is beautiful and good, but he does not directly address pederasty in “Socrates Questions Agathon”.
Diotima - “Now, some people are pregnant in body, and for this reson turn more to women and pursue love in that way, providing themselves through childbirth with immortality and remembrance and happiness […] while others are pregnant in soul — because there surely are those who are even more pregnant in their souls than in their bodies, and these are pregnant with what is fitting for a soul to bear and bring to birth. […] Wisdom and the rest of virtue […] as well as all the craftsmen who are said to be creative [… and] the proper ordering of cities and households, and that is classed moderation and justice.” (209A)
How does Socrates’ speech both reject and draw on each of the previous speeches?
Socrates refutes the claim that love is beautiful, good, etc. and instead asserts that it is the desire for the good and the beautiful (specifically the desire to possess the good forever). He states that love itself is neither innately good nor bad, which contradicts several of the previous speakers (see Phaedrus, Eryximachus, and Agathon) who seem to portray love as being a virtue/always being good and beautiful. However, Socrates does relate to the “pregnancy” of the soul as being a valid form of love (as well as the pregnancy of the body), which enforces some of the claims that were made by Pausanias regarding the desire for the body versus the desire for virtue.
Who is Diotima? What is significant about the fact that Socrates brings her into the speech?
Diotima is a priestess; her part in the speech is significant because she is the only female speaker and she brings to the table a discussion in which pregnancy is used to draw parallels between the forms which love can take (spiritual versus physical). This may be interpreted as being the female perspective on love since, as a woman, she is likely more well-informed on childbirth than the men of the time were.
What is eros according to Socrates/Diotima?
Eros is the desire to possess the good forever.
Who is Alcibiades? What role does he play in the dialogue? What does he reveal about Socrates?
Alcibiades is Socrates’ student; he speaks about Socrates at the end instead of offering thoughts on love itself. He states that Socrates did not pursue him as a lover even though as an older man, Socrates would have likely been expected to take on that role; instead, Alcibiades had to pursue Socrates (and failed). This speech seems to portray Socrates as being more pure and devoted to love of the soul rather than love of the body.
Jeremy Bentham: The Principle of Utility .
What is the principle of utility? Why does he think ethics needs a principle of morality?
An action is right if it increases happiness, wrong if it increases pain.
It provides a clear, no-nonsense guide to what is good and what is evil based on the consequences of actions. In providing such an argument, Bentham effectively removes ambiguity from the ethical system.
What is pain and pleasure? What does pain and pleasure have to do with the principle of utility?
Pain and pleasure can have physical, political, moral, or religious sources and are measured by intensity, duration, certainty/uncertainty, and propinquity/remoteness.
The principle of utility stems from maximizing pleasure while also minimizing pain for as many people as possible.
What are other possible moral principles? Why does he think these are inferior to the principle of utility?
Asceticism (inferior because it leads to people glorifying pain and this cannot be consistently pursued without ruining society)
Sympathy/Antipathy (“most apt to err on the side of severity”; applies punishment where none is deserved, or applies excess punishment. Creates mistrust)
Religion/Divine Command (Is not a distinct principle; cannot be applied to political administration/modern dealings)
Principal of Rights
What’s the naturalistic fallacy? Is Bentham guilty of it?
The naturalistic fallacy is when something is assumed to be good because it is natural.
Bentham may be considered to be guilty of it because he associated pleasure with being good and pain as being bad, which is a naturalistic view of the matter.
What’s Robert Nozick’s experience machine thought experiment? How might it offer a critique of Bentham?
If you were given the opportunity to enter a machine that perfectly replicates human life but maximizes pleasure and eliminates pain, would you choose to? (You would never remember that the machine was a choice) Most people would be intrigued but reject the machine, proving humans desire something beyond just pleasure, we have a need for authenticity, even when it brings pain.
This offers a critique of Bentham because it insinuates that there may be something good found even in pain; additionally, it shows that people do not necessarily gravitate towards the maximization of pleasure, which is what Bentham’s principle of utility relies upon.
Mill and Mill .
According to the Mills, what are the advantages in changing marriage and societal laws to make women fully equal to men?
Page 47
Removing women’s disabilities
Recognizing women as the equals of men in every aspect of citizenship
Opening women up to all honorable employments
Allowing women to have the training and education that would qualify them for the above employment.
Moral education of males (prevents the feeling of unearned distinctions and conceit that comes with it)
Doubling the brain pool
Moral influence of women
Chivalry
Charity
Moral influence of wives on husbands
Keeps the husband from falling below the country’s common standard of approval
On the contrary, hinders him from rising above it
What are the main foundations of modern moral life according to the text? (51) How do these relate to Bentham’s principle of utility?
Justice (each person respects the rights of others) and prudence (each person’s ability to take care of themself)
Bentham’s principle of utility enforces that each person counts as equal to one another (in regards to determining if an action benefits the most people or not); therefore in regards to justice, no one person should get preferential treatment over another. On the other hand, the principle of utility also enforces that each person has a responsibility to maximize the good and minimize the bad. A person cannot look out for the rest of society and maximize the good if they cannot even take care of themself.
What are the negative effects on marriage and society that follow from the current inequality between men and women? (54)
Imbalance of power (unhealthy partnerships), intellectual stifling (to both parties), societal harm (missing out on women’s gifts and talents), and unhealthy family units (families thrive on marriages of mutual respect and admiration)
What does the ideal married life look like? (55-57) What kind of love should dominate in the ideal marriage?
According to Mill, the ideal married life involves both partners being the other’s moral and intellectual equal. They build on the affection of a shared everyday life and the naturally cyclical presence of eros to achieve an unconditional, virtuous partnership, with an emphasis on Appreciative Love before Gift Love.
Aquinas, “Eternal and Natural Law” and Other Selves .
What is the eternal law? Why does he argue there must be an eternal law?
The plan of Divine Providence- (God providing for you) that governs the created order (only known through its effects, governs all things, can be violated by human beings due to reason and free will)
The world is ordered, ordered things must be governed, therefore the eternal law exists. Additionally, if God is pure reason, which we know Him to be as we are made in His image and likeness, He could not create a disordered or ungoverned universe.
Why is it necessary to posit the eternal law even though we can only know it through its effects?
The eternal law is the reason for all the other laws. Despite our inability to perceive it directly, we know it must exist due to its effects (natural and human law must have their grounding somewhere)
Why does Aquinas say that all human affairs are subject to the eternal law?
All human affairs are mental or physical, and all understanding of the eternal law is through understanding (rational creatures choosing to follow the eternal law) or action (nature acts according to God without knowing it).
How is this true even though people violate the eternal law? What might be some examples of this?
Good people understand the eternal law and wish to understand it more; they are guided by faith and wisdom in discovering what is good
Bad people have a limited understanding of the eternal law. Even when they choose to act against it, they are still subject to the consequences or punishments of eternal law
What is the natural law?
The aspect of eternal law that applies to human beings and makes us distinct (live according the the higher inclination of reason, not the lower impulse of pleasure– shared by all living things)
What is the relationship/connection between the natural and eternal law?
The natural law is the way in which humans participate in God’s plan for all things, also known as the eternal law.
What is the first (indemonstrable) first principle of the natural law/practical reason?
Good is to be done and evil is to be avoided (89)
Everyone agrees → disagreement is only over what is good
What are the three areas of natural inclinations that lead to the three principles of the natural law?
Self-Preserving: creatures that wish to remain being alive (all living things, this is why Aquinas considers suicide the crime against the “law of nature”)
Sensing: creatures that interact with the environment and act on behalf of our own benefit (animals)
Reasoning: creatures that possess a curiosity about God, a desire to live in society and an understanding of the Good (humans and angels)
The more specific the principle, the less obvious the virtuous path.
How does Aquinas explain the different assumptions people make about the natural law?
Universal Principles/Specific Conclusions– we all understand the premises of natural law but due to our fallen, imperfect nature, we may come to separate, imperfect conclusions
Aquinas, from Other Selves
What is charity? What is the relationship between friendship and charity?
Agape– the love/friendship of man for God; requires virtue, reciprocity, and communion; spills into the love of others (if friendship requires good will, the only good will we can have for God is through the good will for others in His image and likeness)
How do we have charity for others?
One cannot love another (than God) with charity directly, but only within the same act of love for God
Is charity free from self-love? Why or why not?
Self-love is another form of charity, as it extends to love of God through His image and likeness (in ourselves)
In what sense can we have charity for some people more than others? In what sense can we not?
Preference– love is proportional to the gravity of the sin if you refuse the individual your love (your child vs. a random dude)
Benevolence– wishing good will for another; owed to every human person
Beneficence– taking action for the good of another; only owed to some
Soren Kierkegaard, Works of Love .
How does Kierkegaard define neighbor love (charity/agape)? How is it different from spontaneous love (erotic love & friendship)?
Neighbor love (charity/agape) is a duty given to us by God, as we are made in His image and likeness. We are inclined to it by reason but, due to our fallen nature, not by feeling.
Spontaneous love (eros and friendship) are based on feeling and not entirely free, whereas charity is a duty but free because we have no inclination and the free choice to reject our duty
Who is the neighbor? How ought we to love the neighbor?
The neighbor is anyone we see (essentially, humanity in general). We should love the neighbor without any preference and unconditionally.
What is duty? How does duty lead to freedom?
Duty relates to commanded love (the command to love our neighbors) and this leads to freedom because law prevents our rights from being trampled on, thereby freeing us.
What is the relationship between neighbor love and spontaneous love?
These types of loves seem to be opposite in most regards. Neighbor love is eternal, commanded love and is therefore free because law gives us freedom. However, spontaneous love is temporal and up to chance (since it is erotic love/friendship) and fleeting since eros comes and goes and does not last. Spontaneous love is preferential while neighbor love is Christian love and therefore is love for all.
What happens to self-love in Christian love?
Self-renunciation casts away preferential love and frees us from self-love
What does it mean to love the people we see?
True love is unconditional Christian love, and we should learn to love all the people in our lives because if we cannot even love the people we can see, we cannot love God (who we cannot see).
How does love abide? What does this say about love?
Love is patient and will wait for the other person. True love can withstand time, no matter how long, and can endure difficulties and external pressures..
C.S. Lewis, “Charity” .
What is charity? What distinguishes charity from the other loves (friendship and eros)?
To Lewis, charity is a state of being, not an emotion, that allows us to choose to act on behalf of the good of another. He believes this state of being to unite and properly order the natural loves, as described below.
What elements of love are found in charity?
Gift love, need love, and appreciative love. Charity is not truly a love in itself, as the natural loves are, but acts as a “binding agent” to order and augment the natural loves toward Godly perfection.
What is supernatural charity? How is it different from natural charity?
Supernatural charity is adoration of God, described by Lewis as a grace given by God that is the gift to be most cherished. It is an appreciative love of God that supersedes our need for Him, which natural charity is only able to reflect.